46264 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 2, 1997 / Notices

be sent to the Applicant’s

representatives.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–23164 Filed 8–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5885–8]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request; Reporting and

Recordkeeping Requirements Under

the Perfluorocompound (PFC)

Emission Reduction Partnership for

the Semiconductor Industry EPA ICR

No. 1823.01

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

EPA is planning to submit the following

proposed Information Collection

Request (ICR) to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB):

Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements Under the

Perfluorocompound (PFC) Emission

Reduction Partnership for the

Semiconductor Industry EPA ICR No.

1823.01. 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 November 3, 1997.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency Atmospheric

Pollution Prevention Division, 401 M

Street, SW (6202J), Washington, D.C.

20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Elizabeth Dutrow, Tel.: (202) 233–9061,

Fax: (202) 233–9583, E-mail:

dutrow.elizabeth@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are those which

manufacture semiconductor devices.

Title: Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements Under the PFC Emission

Reduction Partnership for the

Semiconductor Industry EPA ICR No.

1823.01.

Abstract: In April 1993, President

Clinton issued the Climate Change

Action Plan, which establishes the

nation’s commitment to returning U.S.

greenhouse gas emissions to their 1990

levels by the year 2000. EPA’s PFC

Emission Reduction Partnership for the

Semiconductor Industry is an important

voluntary program contributing to the

overall reduction in greenhouse gas

emissions. The PFC Emission Reduction

Partnership for the Semiconductor

Industry, along with ENERGY STAR

Buildings, Green Lights, ENERGY STAR

Computers, and other EPA Programs is

a voluntary program aimed at

preventing pollution rather than

controlling it after its creation. These

programs focus on reducing greenhouse

gas emissions.

EPA has developed this ICR to obtain

authorization to collect information

from Companies participating in the

PFC Emission Reduction Partnership.

By participating in the program, a

Company agrees to endeavor to reduce

PFC emissions. In the Partnership, a

company will prepare an annual report

to be submitted to a designated law firm

that provides an overall estimate of PFC

emissions, and a normalized PFC

emission rate for it’s U.S. facilities.

Information on Company-specific PFC

emissions is aggregated into an

industry-wide annual report, and used

in combination with information on

Companies’ normalized rates of PFC

emissions (submitted on a blind basis)

to evaluate the overall PFC emission

reductions achieved by the program.

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 are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments 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.

Burden Statement: The projected hour

burden for this collection of information

is as follows:

Average Annual Reporting Burden

Hours=8,206.

Average burden hours/response=328.

Frequency of response=1/year.

Estimated number of respondents=25.

Cost burden to respondents:

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden=$455,879.

Total capital and start-up

costs=$1,500.

Estimated Total Operation and

Maintenance Cost=$225.

Purchase of Services Cost=$1,160.

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; 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.

Dated: August 18, 1997.

Jean Lupinacci,

Branch Chief, APPD, ESC/IBCS.

[FR Doc. 97–23226 Filed 8–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5885–9]

National Advisory Council for

Environmental Policy and Technology

Reinvention Criteria Committee; Public

Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, Pub. L. 92463, EPA

gives notice of a two-day meeting of the

National Advisory Council for

Environmental Policy and Technology

(NACEPT) Reinvention Criteria

Committee (RCC). NACEPT provides

advice and recommendations to the

Administrator of EPA on a broad range

of environmental policy issues. The

RCC has been asked to identify criteria

the Agency can use to measure the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 169 / Tuesday, September 2, 1997 / Notices 46265

progress and success of specific

reinvention projects and its overall

reinvention efforts. This meeting is

being held to provide the EPA with

perspectives from representatives of

state and local government,

environmental organizations, academia,

industry, and NGOs.

DATES: The two-day public meeting will

be held Monday, September 29, 1997

from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Tuesday,

September 30, 1997 from 8:30 a.m. to 12

Noon. The meeting will be held at the

Ramada Plaza Hotel Old Town,

Alexandria, Virginia.

ADDRESSES: Materials, or written

comments, may be transmitted to the

Committee through Gwendolyn Whitt,

Designated Federal Officer, NACEPT/

RCC, U.S. EPA, Office of Cooperative

Environmental Management (1601–F),

401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C.

20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gwendolyn Whitt, Designated Federal

Officer for the NACEPT Reinvention

Criteria Committee at 202–260–9484.

Dated: August 20, 1997.

Gwendolyn C.L. Whitt,

Designated Federal Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–23225 Filed 8–29–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5886–4]

Announcement of Stakeholders

Meeting on the new Regulatory Impact

Analysis Framework for implementing

the Safe Drinking Water Act

Amendments of 1996

AGENCY:Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice of stakeholders meeting.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) will be holding a one and

a half day public meeting on September

23 and 24, 1997. The purpose of this

meeting is to have a dialogue with

stakeholders and the public at large on

EPA’s development of a new regulatory

impact analysis framework for proposed

drinking water regulations. The Safe

Drinking Water Act Amendments of

1996 require that, whenever EPA

proposes a national primary drinking

water regulation, EPA must publish a

cost-benefit analysis. EPA would like to

have a dialogue with stakeholders and

the public at large on the various

components of this analysis, including

treatment design, unit treatment costs

and national costs, model systems

development, baseline estimates, data

quality objectives, and benefits analysis.

EPA is seeking input from national,

State, Tribal, municipal, and individual

stakeholders and other interested

parties. This meeting is a continuation

of stakeholder meetings that started in

1995 to obtain input on the Agency’s

Drinking Water Program. These

meetings were initiated as part of the

Drinking Water Program Redirection

efforts to help refocus EPA’s drinking

water priorities and to support strong,

flexible partnerships among EPA, States,

Tribes, local governments, and the

public. At the upcoming meeting, EPA

is seeking input from state and Tribal

drinking water programs, the regulated

community (public water systems),

public health organizations, academia,

environmental and public interest

groups, engineering firms, and other

stakeholders on a number of issues

related to developing the new regulatory

impact analysis framework. EPA

encourages the full participation of

stakeholders throughout this process.

DATES: The stakeholder meeting on the

new regulatory impact analysis

framework for drinking water

regulations will be held on Tuesday,

September 23, 1997 from 9:00 a.m. to

5:00 p.m. EDT and Wednesday,

September 24, 1997 from 9:00 a.m. to

1:00 p.m. EDT.

ADDRESSES: To register for the meeting,

please contact the Safe Drinking Water

Hotline at 1–800–426–4791 between

9:00 am and 5:30 pm EDT. Those

registered for the meeting by Friday,

September 12, 1997 will receive an

agenda, logistics sheet, and background

materials prior to the meeting. Members

of the public who cannot attend the

meeting in person may participate via

conference call and should register with

the Safe Drinking Water Hotline.

Conference lines will be allocated on

the basis of first-reserved, first served.

Members of the public who cannot

participate via conference call or in

person may submit comments in writing

by October 24, 1997, in order for

comments to be included in the meeting

summary, to Ben Smith, at the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M St, SW (4607), Washington, DC,

20460 or smith.ben@epamail.epa.gov.

The meeting will be held in Suite 275,

1255 23rd Street, N.W., Washington,

D.C.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information on meeting

logistics, please contact the Safe

Drinking Water Hotline at 1–800–426–

4791. For information on the activities

related to developing the new regulatory

impact analysis framework and other

EPA activities under the Safe Drinking

Water Act, contact the Safe Drinking

Water Hotline at 1–800–426–4791.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

Under the Safe Drinking Water Act

(SDWA) Amendments of 1996, EPA

must provide a thorough cost-benefit

analysis, as well as comprehensive,

informative, and understandable

information to the public. The 1996

SDWA amendments require that new

regulations be developed so as to ensure

that they represent a meaningful

opportunity for health risk reduction.

Also required is a detailed analysis of

the relationship to: health impacts,

including those to sensitive subgroups;

impacts of other contaminants;

treatment objectives; incremental

impacts above a baseline that considers

current regulations, uncertainty, and

affordability. EPA must also consider

the impact on the technical, financial,

and managerial capacity of water

systems. In so doing, EPA must also use

the best available, peer reviewed science

and methods. The amendments provide

EPA with flexibility to identify and

incorporate new benefits, including

willingness to pay. In addition, EPA has

expanded information-gathering

authority, and must consider point-ofuse and point-of-entry devices. After

first defining a maximum contaminant

level (MCL), or treatment technique

standard based on affordable

technology, EPA must determine

whether the costs of that standard

would be justified by the benefits. If not,

EPA may adjust an MCL to a level that

maximizes health risk reduction

benefits at a cost that is justified by the

benefits. The authority to adjust the

MCL has limits that also require

evaluation. In addition to the Safe

Drinking Water Act, the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act and the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act impose additional

analytical and consultative

requirements in connection with new

rules.

The upcoming meeting deals

specifically with EPA’s efforts to

prepare the framework for the new

regulatory impact analysis, which

includes a series of proposed regulatory

support documents, and plans for

public involvement in rule

development. These documents fall into

three categories: periodically updated

reference works, regulation specific data

documents, and regulation specific

analytical documents. The reference

works consist of manuals for baseline

definition, model systems, benefits

methodologies, data quality objectives,