### 9046 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices

docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats,
information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dr. Nathalie Simon, National Center for Environmental Economics, Office of Policy, (1809T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202–566–2347; fax number: 202–566–2363; email address: simon.nathalie@epa.gov

.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Supporting documents which explain in
detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public
docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center,
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW. Washington, DC. The telephone number for the
Docket Center is 202–566–1744. For
additional information about EPA’s public docket, visit http://www.epa.gov/
dockets

.

Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA)
directs EPA to coordinate Federal and State efforts to improve water quality in the Chesapeake Bay. In 2009, Executive Order (E.O.) 13508 reemphasized this mandate, directing EPA to define the next generation of tools and actions to restore water quality in the Bay and describe the changes to be made to regulations, programs, and policies to implement these actions. The Chesapeake Bay watershed encompasses 64,000 square miles in parts of six states
and the District of Columbia. It is the largest estuary in the United States and the third largest in the world. The Chesapeake Bay’s unique set of ecological and cultural elements has motivated efforts to preserve and restore its condition for more than 25 years. Significant progress has been made over that period however, pollution budgets, called Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), are necessary to continue progress toward the goal of a healthy Bay. The watershed states of New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, West Virginia, Virginia, and Maryland, as well as the District of Columbia, have developed Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) detailing the steps each will take to meet its obligations under the TMDL.

As part of the next phase of this effort, EPA is undertaking an assessment of the costs and benefits of meeting Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment for the Chesapeake Bay. As an input to the TMDL benefits study, EPA’s National
Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) is seeking approval to conduct a stated preference survey to collect data on households’ use of Chesapeake Bay and its watershed, preferences for a variety of water quality improvements likely to follow from pollution reduction programs, and demographic information. If approved, the survey would be administered by mail in two phases to a sample of 9,140 residents living in the Chesapeake Bay states, Chesapeake Bay watershed, and other

east coast states.

Benefits from meeting the TMDL for the Chesapeake Bay will accrue to those who live near the Bay or visit for recreation, those who live near or visit lakes and rivers in the watershed, and those who live further away and/or may never visit the Bay but have a general
concern for the environment. While benefits from the first two categories can be measured using hedonic property value, recreational demand, and other revealed preference approaches, only stated preference methods can capture nonuse benefits (i.e., benefits to those who may never visit the Bay).

Transferring estimates from other
studies based in other estuaries is not advised as these results are unlikely to accurately or completely capture willingness to pay for TMDL-related improvements in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed given the unique character of this water resource and the goods and services it provides. Further, there are limited stated preference studies in the published literature focusing on the Chesapeake Bay, and no studies specifically addressing the environmental improvements predicted under the TMDL. This study will provide policy makers with additional information on the public’s preferences for improvements to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the watershed. NCEE will use the survey responses to estimate willingness to pay for changes related to reductions in nitrogen, phosphorous, and sediment loadings to the Bay and lakes in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. The analysis relies on state
of the art theoretical and statistical tools for non-market welfare analysis. The results of this study will inform the public and policy makers about the benefits of improvements to the Chesapeake Bay and lakes in the watershed. A non-response survey will
also be administered to inform the interpretation and validation of survey responses. Participation in the survey will be voluntary and the identity of the respondents will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. The project is being undertaken pursuant to section 104 of the Clean
Water Act which authorizes and directs
the EPA Administrator to conduct research into a number of subject areas related to water quality, water pollution, and water pollution prevention and
abatement. This section also authorizes
the EPA Administrator to conduct research into methods of analyzing the costs and benefits of programs carried
out under the Clean Water Act.

Form Numbers: None. Respondents/affected entities: Individuals 18 years of age or older residing in one of 17 east coast U.S.
states and the District of Columbia.

Respondent’s obligation to respond: Voluntary.

Estimated number of respondents: 2,742 total to full survey total (includes 150 from pretest and 2,592 from mainsurvey. An additional 770 total to nonresponse follow-up survey (50 from pretest and 720 from full survey administration).

Frequency of response: One time
collection.

Total estimated burden: 887 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

Total estimated cost: $20,682 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

John Moses, Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 2013–02763 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**[EPA–HQ–OECA–2012–0655; FRL–9527–9]**

**Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for**  **Review and Approval; Comment Request; NSPS for Ammonium Sulfate**  **Manufacturing Plants (Renewal)**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq. ), this document announces that an Information Collection Request (ICR) has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved
collection. The ICR which is abstracted
below describes the nature of the
collection and the estimated burden and

cost.

**DATES :**  Additional comments may be submitted on or before March 11, 2013.


### 9047 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, referencing docket ID number EPA–HQ– OECA–2012–0655, to: (1) EPA online, using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), or by email to: docket.oeca@epa.gov, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center, mail code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and (2) OMB at: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC

20503.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Learia Williams, Monitoring, Assistance, and Media Programs Division, Office of Compliance, Mail Code 2227A, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 564–4113; fax number: (202) 564–0050; email address: williams.learia@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On October 17, 2012 (77 FR 63813), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received no comments. Any additional comments on
this ICR should be submitted to both EPA and OMB within 30 days of this

notice.

EPA has established a public docket
for this ICR under docket ID number EPA–HQ–OECA–2012–0655, which is available for either public viewing
online at either http:// www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202) 566–1752.

Use EPA’s electronic docket and comment system at http:// www.regulations.gov to either submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and
to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select ‘‘docket search,’’ then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA’s policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at http://www.regulations.gov

, as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI), or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to www.regulations.gov.

Title: NSPS for Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing Plants (Renewal).

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 1066.07, OMB Control Number 2060–

0032.

ICR Status: This ICR is scheduled to expire on April 30, 2013. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of
information while this submission is pending at OMB.

Abstract: The affected entities are subject to the General Provisions of the NSPS at 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, and any changes, or additions to the Provisions specified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart PP.

Owners or operators of the affected
facilities must submit an initial notification report, performance tests, and periodic reports and results. Owners or operators are also required to
maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. Reports are required semiannually at a minimum.

Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is estimated to average 71 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: Owners or operator of ammonium sulfate manufacturing plants.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2. Frequency of Response: Initially, occasionally, and semiannually.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

284.

Estimated Total Annual Cost: $27,449, which includes $27,449 in labor costs, and neither capital/startup costs, nor operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an
increase in burden hours for both the respondents and the Agency due to a
correction in the calculation methodology. The previous ICR assumed the hours per occurrence for each burden activity included technical, managerial, and clerical hours. This ICR assumes these hours per occurrence are for technical hours only, and calculates additional managerial and clerical hours as 5 and 10 percent of technical hours.
There is also an increase in the respondent burden costs due to a change in labor rates. This ICR uses updated labor rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to calculate respondent
burden costs.

Additionally, there is a decrease in burden costs for the Agency from the most recently approved ICR due to a correction in labor rates. The previous ICR incorrectly used civilian rates to calculate Agency burden. This ICR uses rates from OPM, which results in an overall reduction in the Agency cost

estimates.

John Moses, Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 2013–02762 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**[FRL–9777–9]**

**Public Water System Supervision Program Revision for the State of** 

**Texas**

**AGENCY :**  United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice of tentative approval.

**SUMMARY :**  Notice is hereby given that the State of Texas is revising its approved Public Water System Supervision Program. Texas has adopted three EPA drinking water rules, namely the: (1) Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2), (2) the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBP2), and (3) the Public Notification Rule minor revisions (PN/MR). EPA has determined that the proposed LT2, DBP2, and the PN/MRs submitted by Texas are no less stringent than the