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

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/pastsips.htm. The adequate 

MVEBs are shown in the following 

table: 

METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON AREA

MVEBS 2009 ATTAINMENT PLAN

AND 2010 CONTINGENCY PLAN

Milestone 

year 

VOCs 

(tons per day) 

NOX

(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 Total 

Maximum 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

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 main 

survey. 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES