### 9045 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 26 / Thursday, February 7, 2013 / Notices

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/pastsips.htm. The adequate MVEBs are shown in the following table:



### M ETROPOLITAN 

### W ASHINGTON 

### A REA 

### MVEB S 

### 2009 A TTAINMENT 

### P LAN

AND 

### 2010 C ONTINGENCY 

### P LAN

Milestone

year VOCs (tons per day) NO X (tons per day)

2009 .......... 66.5 146.1 2010 .......... N/A 144.3

Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990. EPA’s conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The criteria by which EPA determines whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). EPA has described the process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in 40 CFR 93.118(f) and has followed this rule in making its adequacy determination.

Dated: January 25, 2013. W.C. Early, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 2013–02808 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[FRL–9528–1]**

**Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses** 

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

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  This document announces the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 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 regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Rick Westlund (202) 566–1682, or email at westlund.rick@epa.gov and please refer to the appropriate EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests
OMB Approvals

EPA ICR Number 0161.12; Foreign Purchaser Acknowledgment Statement of Unregistered Pesticides; 40 CFR part 168, subpart D; was approved on 01/04/ 2013; OMB Number 2070–0027; expires on 01/31/2016; Approved without change.

EPA ICR Number 2263.04; NSPS for Petroleum Refineries for which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced after May 14, 2007; 40 CFR part 60, subparts A and Ja; was approved on 01/07/2013; OMB Number 2060–0602; expires on 12/31/ 2015; Approved without change.

EPA ICR Number 1718.09; Fuel Quality Regulations for Diesel Fuel Sold in 2001 and Later Years; Tax-Exempt(Dyed) Highway Diesel Fuel; and NonRoad Locomotive and Marine Diesel Fuel (Renewal); 40 CFR 80.561 and 80.597; and 40 CFR part 80 subpart I; was approved on 01/19/2013; OMB Number 2060–0308; expires on 01/31/ 2016; Approved with change.

EPA ICR Number 2450.01; EPA’s Design for the Environment (DfE) Partner of the Year Awards Program; was approved on 01/23/2013; OMB Number 2070–0184; expires on 01/31/ 2016; Approved with change.

EPA ICR Number 1901.05; NSPS for Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units Constructed on or before August 30, 1999; 40 CFR part 60, subparts A and BBBB; was approved on 01/29/2013; OMB Number 2060–0424; expires on 01/31/2016; Approved without change.

EPA ICR Number 1061.12; NSPS for the Phosphate Fertilizer Industry; 40 CFR part 60, subparts T, U, V, W and X; was approved on 01/30/2013; OMB Number 2060–0037; expires on 01/31/ 2016; Approved without change.

EPA ICR Number 1935.04; Standardized Permit for RCRA Hazardous Waste Management Facilities (Renewal); 40 CFR part 267; 40 CFR 270.290, 270.300–270.315; was approved on 01/30/2013; OMB Number 2050–0182; expires on 01/31/2016; Approved with change.

EPA ICR Number 2323.05; NESHAP for Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources; 40 CFR part 63, subparts A and VVVVVV; was approved on 01/30/2013; OMB Number 2060–0621; expires on 01/31/2016; Approved without change.

John Moses, Director, Collections Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 2013–02761 Filed 2–6–13; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**[EPA–HQ–OA–2012–0033; FRL–9527–8]**

**Information Collection Request Submitted to OMB for Review and**  **Approval; Comment Request; Willingness To Pay Survey for**  **Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pre-Test, and**  **Implementation**

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

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted an information collection request (ICR), ‘‘Willingness to Pay Survey for Chesapeake Bay TotalMaximum Daily Load: Instrument, Pretest, and Implementation’’ (EPA ICR No. 2456.01, OMB Control No. 2010–NEW) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). This is a request for approval of a new collection. Public comments were previously requested via the Federal Register (77 FR 31006) on May 24, 2012 during a 60-day comment period, which was later extended for an additional 30 days (77 FR 43822). This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. 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.

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

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID Number EPA– HQ–OA–2012–0033, to (1) EPA online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method); by email to oei.docket@epa.gov; by fax at (202) 566– 9744; or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, and (2) OMB via email to
oira

_ submission@omb.eop.gov . Address comments to OMB Desk Officer for EPA.

EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public


### 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.