64318 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY (EPA) 

Statement of Priorities 

OVERVIEW 

Established in 1970, the 

Environmental Protection Agency is the 

primary federal agency responsible for 

protecting public health and the 

environment by improving air, land and 

water quality. EPA Administrator Lisa 

Jackson has embarked on an ambitious 

effort to restore momentum to EPA’s 

core programs while also tackling 

emerging challenges such as climate 

change. Underlying this effort is the 

premise that environmental protection 

and economic growth are mutually 

achievable – that we can increase 

economic activity and create new jobs 

while we reduce harmful emissions and 

the dependence on polluting sources of 

energy. The Agency is dedicated to 

upholding the following values in its 

efforts to maintain the strongest level of 

environmental protection: 

Scientific Integrity. The public health 

and environmental laws that Congress 

has enacted depend on rigorous 

adherence to the best available science. 

Scientific findings should be 

independent, using well-established 

scientific methods, including peer 

review, to assure rigor, accuracy, and 

impartiality. 

Following the Rule of Law. EPA 

recognizes that respect for 

Congressional mandates and judicial 

decisions is the hallmark of a principled 

regulatory agency. Where EPA exercises 

discretion, it must be conducted in good 

faith and in keeping with the directives 

of Congress and the courts. 

Transparency. EPA will apply the 

principles of transparency and openness 

to the rulemaking process. Public trust 

in the Agency demands that EPA reach 

out to all stakeholders fairly and 

impartially, that EPA consider the views 

and data presented carefully and 

objectively, and that EPA fully disclose 

the information that forms the bases for 

our decisions. 

Environmental Justice. For 

generations, pollution has been a 

disproportionate problem in lowincome and minority communities, 

particularly for the children in those 

communities. EPA is initiating major 

improvements with outreach and 

interaction with those who have been 

historically underrepresented in agency 

decision making, including the 

disenfranchised in cities and rural areas, 

communities of color, native Americans, 

and people disproportionately impacted 

by pollution. EPA will identify, where 

possible, the public health or 

environmental impacts of policies, 

programs and activities on these 

communities and take action, as 

appropriate, to address such impacts. 

The American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act 

Environmental protection and 

economic growth are complementary 

goals. With its partners, EPA is 

overseeing investment from the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act (ARRA) of 2009 in ‘‘green jobs’’ and 

a healthier environment. To reach this 

goal, $7.22 billion has been designated 

for projects and programs administered 

by EPA. To support a green economy 

and a green environment, EPA lends 

support to innovation, investment and 

technology in the following 

environmental areas: 

• Water Infrastructure Improvements 

for Communities: $4 billion for state 

clean water funding and $2 billion for 

state drinking water funding. This 

new infusion of money will help 

states and local government finance 

many of the overdue improvements to 

public waters and wastewater systems 

that are essential to protecting public 

health and assuring good water 

quality. 20 percent of this funding 

will be targeted towards green 

infrastructure, water and energy 

efficiency, and environmentally 

innovative projects. 

• Brownfield Restorations: $100 

million for grants to clean up and 

return former industrial and 

commercial sites to their communities 

for productive use. $5 million dollars 

is set aside for job training in the 

assessment and remediation of these 

sites. 

• Diesel Emissions Reductions: $300 

million for grants and loans to help 

regional, state and local governments, 

tribes, and non-profit organizations 

with projects that reduce harmful 

diesel emissions from vehicles like 

school buses, garbage trucks, 

construction equipment, marine 

vessels, and locomotives. Reducing 

emissions helps to reduce the risk of 

asthma, respiratory illnesses and 

premature deaths. 

• Accelerating Superfund Site 

Cleanups: $600 million for the 

cleanup of hazardous wastes from 

sites. EPA will use this funding to 

increase the pace of these cleanups 

already underway, and return the 

sites to our communities for 

productive use. 

• Accelerating Leaking Underground 

Storage Tank Cleanups: $200 million 

for the cleanup of petroleum leaks 

that occurred from underground 

storage tanks. There are 

approximately 100,000 sites eligible 

for cleanup where leaks threaten soil 

or water quality or result in fire or 

explosion hazards. 

• Responsible Oversight: $20 million 

for the EPA Office of Inspector 

General for audits, evaluations, 

investigations and oversight of the 

Recovery Act funding to ensure that 

every penny is spent on projects that 

benefit Americans. 

EPA has a number of successes in 

fulfilling its obligations under the 

American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act. 

• In the first EPA-related award under 

the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act, EPA devoted 

nearly $100 million in environmental 

funding to be invested in Colorado. 

This includes more than $65 million 

for improving drinking water and 

wastewater infrastructure, $2.5 

million for leaking underground 

storage tanks and $2 million for 

revitalizing Brownfield sites. 

• In the single largest grant in its 

history, EPA awarded more than $430 

million to the State of New York for 

wastewater infrastructure projects that 

will create thousands of jobs, 

jumpstart local economies and protect 

human health and the environment 

across the state. The state will use the 

Recovery Act grant to provide money 

to municipal and county governments 

and wastewater utilities for projects to 

protect lakes, ponds and streams in 

communities across New York. 

• The Iron Mountain Mine Superfund 

site near Redding, California, will 

receive between $10-25 million that 

will make it possible to dredge, treat, 

and dispose of heavy-metal 

contaminated sediments in the Spring 

Creek Arm of the Kewich Reservoir in 

18 months, rather than three years. 

EPA’s portion of the ARRA will 

encourage further growth in a greener 

workforce by creating sustainable jobs 

that help produce cleaner drinking 

water, purer air, environmentally 

friendly urban and rural redevelopment, and reduced greenhouse 

gases. For new information on the stateby-state distributions for EPA’s ARRA 

funds, see 

http://www.epa.gov/recovery. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64319 

HIGHLIGHTS OF EPA’S 

REGULATORY PLAN 

In developing its agenda, five 

priorities form the core of EPA’s 

regulatory focus: 

Climate Change 

In the U.S., energy-related activities 

account for three-quarters of humangenerated greenhouse gas emissions, 

mostly in the form of carbon dioxide 

emissions from burning fossil fuels. 

More than half the energy-related 

emissions come from large stationary 

sources such as power plants, while 

about a third comes from transportation. 

Industrial processes (such as the 

production of cement, steel, and 

aluminum), agriculture, forestry, other 

land use, and waste management are 

also important sources of greenhouse 

gas emissions in the United States. This 

year, EPA is taking the first Federal 

regulatory steps to address the problem 

of global climate change. 

New Mandatory Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting. In the fall of 2009, EPA will 

publish a final rule requiring mandatory 

reporting of greenhouse gas emissions 

from targeted sectors of the economy. 

This rule, funds for which were 

designated by the FY2008 Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, establishes 

monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping requirements on facilities 

that produce, import, or emit 

greenhouse gases above a specific 

threshold in order to provide 

comprehensive and accurate data to 

support a range of future climate policy 

options. 

Recognition that Greenhouse Gases 

Pose a Danger to Public Health and 

Welfare. On April 24, 2009, the 

Administrator proposed Endangerment 

and Cause or Contribute Findings under 

section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. This 

action, in response to a 2007 Supreme 

Court decision, proposed to find that the 

current and projected concentrations of 

the mix of six key greenhouse gases - 

carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), 

nitrous oxide (N2O), 

hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), 

perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur 

hexafluoride (SF6) - in the atmosphere 

endanger the public health and welfare 

of current and future generations 

through climate change. As part of this 

action, the Administrator further 

proposed to find that the combined 

emissions of four of these six 

greenhouse gases from new motor 

vehicles and motor vehicle engines 

contribute to the atmospheric 

concentrations of these key greenhouse 

gases and hence to the threat of climate 

change. 

Vehicle Emissions. In the fall of 2009, 

EPA will propose to set national 

emissions standards under section 202 

(a) of the Clean Air Act to control 

greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 

passenger cars and light-duty trucks, 

and medium-duty passenger vehicles, as 

part of a joint rulemaking with National 

Highway Traffic and Safety 

Administration (NHTSA). This joint 

rulemaking effort was announced by 

President Obama on May 19, 2009. The 

GHG standards would significantly 

reduce the GHG emissions from these 

light-duty vehicles. 

Renewable Fuels Standard. In May of 

2009, EPA proposed a rule that will 

address climate change and energy 

security by increasing the nation’s use 

of renewable fuels. This rulemaking 

implements provisions in Title II of the 

2007 Energy Independence and Security 

Act (EISA) that amend Section 211(o) of 

the Clean Air Act. The amendments 

revise the National Renewable Fuels 

Standard Program in the United States, 

increasing the national requirement to a 

total of 36 billion gallons of total 

renewable fuel in 2022. The 

amendments also establish new 

eligibility requirements for meeting the 

renewable fuel standards, including the 

establishment of minimum lifecycle 

greenhouse gas reduction thresholds for 

the various categories of renewable 

fuels. 

For more information about these 

regulatory actions, as well as 

information about other programs and 

activities related to climate change, 

please visit 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ or 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/ 

regulations.htm. 

Improving Air Quality 

The U.S. continues to face serious air 

pollution challenges, with large areas of 

the country that still cannot meet 

federal air quality standards and many 

communities still facing health threats 

from exposure to toxics. While EPA has 

made tremendous progress toward 

achieving clean, healthy air that is safe 

to breathe, air pollution continues to be 

a great problem. The average adult 

breathes more than 3000 gallons of air 

every day, and children breathe more air 

per pound of body weight. Air 

pollutants can remain in the 

environment for long periods of time 

and can be carried by the wind 

hundreds of miles from their origin. 

Ambient Air Quality. This year’s 

Regulatory Plan describes efforts to 

review the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for oxides 

of nitrogen, oxides of sulfur, ozone, and 

particulates. The Clean Air Act requires 

EPA to review the NAAQS every 5 years 

for the primary (health-based) and 

secondary (welfare-based) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

and, if appropriate, revise these 

standards. Each review consists of an 

exhaustive assessment of the current 

scientific evidence detailing the health 

and welfare effects of exposure to the 

pollutants, and a policy assessment of 

the policy implications of that evidence. 

Each review will conclude with the EPA 

Administrator either retaining or 

revising the standards, taking into 

consideration the views of independent 

scientists and the public. 

Reducing Harmful Emissions from 

Power Plants. Under the federal 

structure set up by the Clean Air Act, it 

is the States who are primarily 

responsible for bringing about the 

pollutant emission reductions necessary 

to reach attainment with the NAAQS. 

However, EPA does help achieve these 

reductions through national programs 

requiring emission reductions from both 

mobile and stationary sources. This 

Regulatory Plan describes one 

particularly significant such program — 

the Clean Air Transport Rule — which 

employs a market-based ‘‘cap and trade’’ 

program to bring about broad reductions 

in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides 

from power plants in the eastern half of 

the United States. This program is 

designed to reduce the amount of 

pollution that is transported by the 

wind over long distances. This 

transported pollution can be a large part 

of the total pollution in many eastern 

cities, and controlling it nationally is a 

crucial complement to the States’ efforts 

to achieve clean air. 

Cleaner Air from Improved 

Technology. EPA continues to address 

toxic air pollution under authority of 

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. 

The centerpiece of this effort is the 

‘‘Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology’’ (MACT) program, which 

requires that all major sources of a given 

type use emission controls that better 

reflect the current state of the art. One 

of these efforts is by setting standards 

for industrial, commercial, and 

institutional boilers and process heaters. 

For more information about these 

regulatory actions, as well as 

information about other programs and 

activities related to air quality, please 

visit http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64320 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

Management of Chemical Risks 

EPA’s Administrator has highlighted 

the need to strengthen EPA’s chemical 

management program as one of her 

priorities coming in to the Agency. As 

part of this process, the Agency is 

evaluating its existing chemicals 

program to determine how best to ramp 

up efforts to assess, prioritize and take 

risk management action on chemicals of 

concern. EPA intends to announce the 

specifics of this effort and will seek 

public input. 

Protection from Lead During and 

After Renovation. EPA is continuing its 

efforts to implement the final Lead; 

Renovation, Repair, and Painting 

Program Rule that was issued in 2008. 

As part of these efforts, EPA will be 

developing revisions to the rule to 

address several issues raised in 

litigation, including the universe of 

housing where lead-safe work practices 

are required, the provision of additional 

information on renovation activities to 

owners and occupants, and possibly 

additional requirements to ensure that 

renovation work areas have been 

adequately cleaned after renovation 

work has been finished and before the 

areas are re-occupied. 

For more information about these 

regulatory actions, as well as 

information about other programs and 

activities related to the management of 

chemical risks, please visit 

http://www.epa.gov/oppts/. 

Cleaning up Hazardous Waste 

EPA envisions communities where 

blighted properties are transformed into 

safe and productive parcels, and threats 

to human health are properly mitigated, 

leading to jobs and a reinvestment in 

land, communities, and citizens. EPA’s 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response (OSWER) contributes to the 

Agency’s overall mission of protecting 

public health and the environment by 

focusing on, preparing for, preventing 

and responding to chemical and oil 

spills, accidents, and emergencies; 

enhancing homeland security; 

increasing the beneficial use and 

recycling of secondary materials, the 

safe management of wastes and cleaning 

up contaminated property and making it 

available for reuse. Several regulatory 

priorities for the upcoming fiscal year 

will promote stewardship and resource 

conservation and focus regulatory 

efforts on risk reduction and statutory 

compliance. 

Spill Prevention Control, and 

Countermeasures. EPA is considering 

amending the Spill Prevention, Control, 

and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan 

requirements issued on December 5, 

2008 (73 FR 74236), based on comments 

received on a February 2009 notice. The 

rule, when finalized, will streamline 

and reduce the burden imposed on the 

regulated community for complying 

with these SPCC requirements, while 

maintaining protection of human health 

and the environment. 

Financial Responsibility. Under 

Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA), EPA is to promulgate 

requirements that require certain classes 

of facilities to establish and maintain 

evidence of financial responsibility 

consistent with the degree and duration 

of risks from the production, treatment, 

and transportation, storage or disposal 

of CERCLA hazardous substances. 

Additionally, EPA is to publish a notice 

of the classes of facilities for which 

financial responsibility requirements 

will be first developed. To fulfill the 

notice requirement, EPA identified the 

certain classes of facilities within the 

hardrock mining industry as the classes 

of facilities for which the Agency will 

first develop financial responsibility 

requirements under CERCLA 108(b). In 

addition, the Agency plans to publish a 

notice by December 2009 in which it 

will identify other possible classes of 

facilities for which the Agency will 

consider developing financial 

responsibility requirements. 

Protection from Inadequate 

Management of Coal Waste. Coal 

Combustion Residuals (CCRs) comprise 

one of the largest industrial waste 

streams. To protect the public from 

human health risks and to prevent 

environmental damage resulting from 

present disposal practices, EPA expects 

to propose a rule by December 2009 for 

the management of CCRs in landfills 

and surface impoundments. In 

developing the proposed rule, the 

Agency will consider comments it 

received on its August 2007 notice of 

data availability, plus any additional 

information that the Agency has 

collected or has been provided 

regarding the management of these 

residuals. 

For more information about these 

regulatory actions, as well as 

information about other programs and 

activities related to hazardous waste, 

please visit http://www.epa.gov/oswer/. 

Protecting America’s Water 

EPA will intensify its work to restore 

water quality protections in our nation’s 

streams, rivers, lakes, bays, oceans and 

aquifers. EPA will make robust use of its 

authority to restore threatened treasures 

such as the Great Lakes and the 

Chesapeake Bay, address neglected 

urban rivers, strengthen drinking water 

safety programs, and reduce pollution 

from industrial and non-industrial 

discharges. Three regulatory priorities 

for the coming fiscal year will help 

achieve some of these goals. 

Improving Water Quality. EPA plans 

to address challenging water quality 

problems in two rulemakings during 

Fiscal Year 2010. First, the Agency will 

publish final standards to address 

erosion and sediment discharges 

associated with construction and 

development activities. Later in the 

fiscal year, EPA plans to solicit 

comment on proposed standards for 

cooling water intakes for electric power 

plants and for other manufacturers who 

use large amounts of cooling water. The 

goal of the proposed rule will be to 

protect aquatic organisms from being 

killed or injured through impingement 

or entrainment. 

For more information about these 

regulatory actions, as well as 

information about other programs and 

activities related to water, please visit 

http://www.epa.gov/ow/. 

Aggregate Costs and Benefits 

EPA has calculated a combined 

aggregate estimate of the costs and 

benefits of regulations included in the 

Regulatory Plan. For the fiscal year 

2009, EPA has been able to gather 

sufficient data on seven of the twentytwo anticipated regulations to include 

them in an aggregate estimate. For the 

remaining actions, costs and benefits 

have not yet been calculated for various 

reasons. The regulations included in the 

aggregate estimate of costs and benefits 

are: 

• Primary NAAQS for Nitrogen Dioxide 

(2060-AO19); 

• Control of Emissions from New 

Marine Compression-Ignition Engines 

(2060-AO38); 

• EPA/NHTSA Joint Rulemaking for 

Light-Duty GHG Emission and CAFE 

Standards (2060-AP58); 

• Combined Rulemaking for Industrial, 

Commercial, and Institutional Boilers 

and Process Heaters at Major Sources 

of HAP and Industrial, Commercial, 

and Institutional Boilers at Area 

Sources (2060-AM44); 

• Revisions to the Spill Prevention, 

Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) 

Rule, 40 CFR 112 (2050-AG16); 

• Standards for Cooling Water Intake 

Structures (2040-AE95); and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64321 

• Effluent Limitations Guidelines and 

Standards for the Construction and 

Development (C&D) Point Source 

Category (2040-AE91). 

EPA obtained aggregate estimates of 

total costs and benefits assuming both a 

three percent discount rate and a seven 

percent discount rate. However, one of 

the regulations listed above (C&D) was 

not included in the seven percent 

aggregation due to lack of data. Given a 

three percent discount rate, benefits 

range from $114 billion to $360 billion 

while the costs range from $17 billion 

to $30 billion. With a seven percent 

discount rate, and omitting one rule, 

benefits range from $75 billion to $305 

billion. Costs with a seven percent 

discount rate range from $12 billion to 

$22 billion. In both cases, cost savings 

were treated as benefits, and all values 

are converted to 2008 dollars using a 

GDP deflator. 

These results should be considered 

with caution. As with any aggregate 

estimate of total costs and benefits, 

these estimates must be highly 

qualified. First, there are significant 

gaps in data. In general, the benefits 

estimates reported above do not include 

values for benefits that have been 

quantified but not monetized and 

missing values for qualitative benefits, 

such as some human health benefits and 

ecosystem health improvements. 

Second, methodologies and types of 

costs/benefits considered are 

inconsistent, as are the units of analysis. 

Some of the costs/benefits are described 

as annualized values, while other values 

are specific to one year. Third, problems 

with aggregation can arise from differing 

baselines. Finally, the ranges presented 

do not reflect the full range of 

uncertainty in the benefit and cost 

estimates for these rules. 

Rules Expected to Affect Small Entities 

By better coordinating small business 

activities, EPA aims to improve its 

technical assistance and outreach 

efforts, minimize burdens to small 

businesses in its regulations, and 

simplify small businesses’ participation 

in its voluntary programs. A number of 

rules included in this Plan might be of 

particular interest to small businesses 

including: 

• Combined Rulemaking for Industrial, 

Commercial, and Institutional Boilers 

and Process Heaters at Major Sources 

of HAP and Industrial, Commercial, 

and Institutional Boilers at Area 

Sources (2060-AM44); 

• Renewable Fuel Standard Program 

(2060-AO810). 

CONCLUSION 

EPA’s Regulatory Plan is an important 

element of the Agency’s strategy for 

achieving environmental results within 

the framework described above. Taken 

as a whole, the Agency’s Regulatory 

Plan will ensure that the Nation 

continues to achieve improvements in 

environmental quality while at the same 

time promoting economic growth. 

EPA 

PRERULE STAGE 

133. ∑ LEAD; RENOVATION, REPAIR, 

AND PAINTING PROGRAM FOR 

PUBLIC AND COMMERCIAL 

BUILDINGS 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major status 

under 5 USC 801 is undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

Undetermined 

Legal Authority: 

15 USC 2682(c)(3) 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 745 

Legal Deadline: 

Other, Judicial, April 22, 2010, 

Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. 

NPRM, Judicial, December 15, 2011. 

Final, Judicial, July 15, 2013. 

Abstract: 

Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires 

EPA to regulate renovation or 

remodeling activities in target housing 

(most pre-1978 housing), pre-1978 

public buildings, and commercial 

buildings that create lead-based paint 

hazards. On April 22, 2008, EPA issued 

a final rule to address lead-based paint 

hazards created by these activities in 

target housing and child-occupied 

facilities built before 1978. In this rule, 

child-occupied facilities are a subset of 

public and commercial buildings or 

facilities where children under age 6 

spend a great deal of time. The 2008 

rule established requirements for 

training renovators, other renovation 

workers, and dust sampling 

technicians; for certifying renovators, 

dust sampling technicians, and 

renovation firms; for accrediting 

providers of renovation and dust 

sampling technician training; for 

renovation work practices; and for 

recordkeeping. This new rulemaking 

will address renovation or remodeling 

activities in the remaining buildings 

described in TSCA section 402(c)(3): 

Public buildings built before 1978 and 

commercial buildings that are not 

child-occupied facilities. 

Statement of Need: 

Statutory requirement. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires 

EPA to regulate renovation or 

remodeling activities that create leadbased paint hazards in target housing, 

which is defined by statute to cover 

most pre-1978 housing, public 

buildings built before 1978, and 

commercial buildings. 

Alternatives: 

Yet to be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Yet to be determined. 

Risks: 

Yet to be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM 04/00/10 

NPRM 12/00/11 

Final Action 07/00/13 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Undetermined 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined 

Federalism: 

Undetermined 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5381; N/A 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/ 

renovation.htm 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64322 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

Agency Contact: 

Hans Scheifele 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 564–1459 

Email: scheifele.hans@epamail.epa.gov 

Cindy Wheeler 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–0484 

Fax: 202 566–0471 

Email: wheeler.cindy@epa.gov 

RIN: 2070–AJ56 

EPA 

134. CERCLA 108(B) FINANCIAL 

RESPONSIBILITY 

Priority: 

Other Significant 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 9608 (b) 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

Section 108(b) of the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, 

establishes certain authorities 

concerning financial responsibility 

requirements. The Agency has already 

identified classes of facilities within the 

hardrock mining industry as those for 

which financial responsibility 

requirements will be first developed. 

The Agency is currently examining the 

following classes of facilities for 

possible development of financial 

responsibility requirements under 

CERCLA Section 108(b): hazardous 

waste generators, hazardous waste 

recyclers, metal finishers, wood 

treatment facilities and chemical 

manufacturers. This list may be revised 

as the Agency’s evaluation proceeds. 

EPA is scheduled to complete and 

publish in the Federal Register a notice 

identifying potential categories of 

facilities by December 2009. 

Statement of Need: 

The Agency is currently examining 

various classes of facilities that may 

produce, transport, treat, store or 

dispose of hazardous substances for 

development of financial responsibility 

requirements under CERCLA Section 

108(b). 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended. 

Alternatives: 

To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

To be determined. 

Risks: 

To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Priority Notice 07/28/09 74 FR 37213 

FR Notice 01/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5350; EPA publication 

information: Priority Notice - 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAWASTE/2009/July/Day-28/f16819.pdf; 

EPA Docket information: EPA-HQSFUND-2009-0265 

Agency Contact: 

Ben Lesser 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

5304P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 703 308–0314 

Email: lesser.ben@epa.gov 

Elaine Eby 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

5304P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 703 308–8449 

Email: eby.elaine@epa.gov 

RIN: 2050–AG56 

EPA 

PROPOSED RULE STAGE 

135. COMBINED RULEMAKING FOR 

INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND 

INSTITUTIONAL BOILERS AND 

PROCESS HEATERS AT MAJOR 

SOURCES OF HAP AND INDUSTRIAL, 

COMMERCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL 

BOILERS AT AREA SOURCES 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

This action may affect the private 

sector under PL 104-4. 

Legal Authority: 

Clean Air Act, sec 112 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 63 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, April 15, 2010, A 60 

day extension for proposal was granted 

on June 30, 2009. 

Final, Judicial, December 16, 2010. 

Abstract: 

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

outlines the statutory requirements for 

EPA’s stationary source air toxics 

program. Section 112 mandates that 

EPA develop standards for hazardous 

air pollutants (HAP) for both major and 

area sources listed under section 112(c). 

Section 112(k) requires development of 

standards for area sources which 

account for 90% of the emissions in 

urban areas of the 30 urban (HAP) 

listed in the Integrated Urban Air 

Toxics Strategy. These area source 

standards can require control levels 

which are equivalent to either 

maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) or generally 

available control technology (GACT). 

The Integrated Air Toxics Strategy lists 

industrial boilers and 

commercial/institutional boilers as area 

source categories for regulation 

pursuant to section 112(c). Industrial 

boilers and institutional/commercial 

boilers are on the list of section 

112(c)(6) source categories. In this 

rulemaking, EPA will develop 

standards for these source categories. 

Statement of Need: 

As a result of the vacatur of the 

Industrial Boiler MACT, the Agency 

will develop another rulemaking under 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64323 

CAA section 112 which will reduce 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 

emissions from this source category. 

Recent court decisions on other CAA 

section 112 rules will be considered in 

developing this regulation. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Clean Air Act, section 112. 

Alternatives: 

Not yet determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Not yet determined. 

Risks: 

Not yet determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 04/00/10 

Final Action 12/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Yes 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations 

Government Levels Affected: 

Local, State 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 4884. This rulemaking 

combines the area source rulemaking 

for boilers and the rulemaking for reestablishing the vacated NESHAP for 

boilers and process heaters. EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790 

Agency Contact: 

Jim Eddinger 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C439–01 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5426 

Email: eddinger.jim@epamail.epa.gov 

Robert J. Wayland 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

D243–01 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–1045 

Fax: 919 541–5450 

Email: wayland.robertj@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AM44 

EPA 

136. REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL 

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 

FOR PARTICULATE MATTER 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 50 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is 

required to review and, if appropriate, 

revise the air quality criteria for the 

primary (health-based) and secondary 

(welfare-based) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) every 5 

years. On October 17, 2006, EPA 

published a final rule to revise the 

primary and secondary NAAQS for 

particulate matter to provide increased 

protection of public health and welfare. 

With regard to the primary standard for 

fine particles (generally referring to 

particles less than or equal to 2.5 

micrometers in diameter, PM2.5), EPA 

revised the level of the 24-hour PM2.5 

standard to 35 micrograms per cubic 

meter (ug/m3) and retained the level 

of the annual PM2.5 standard at 15 

ug/m3. With regard to primary 

standards for particles generally less 

than or equal to 1 micrometers in 

diameter (PM10), EPA retained the 24- 

hour PM10 standard and revoked the 

annual PM10 standard. With regard to 

secondary PM standards, EPA made 

them identical in all respects to the 

primary PM standards, as revised. EPA 

initiated the current review in 2007 

with a workshop to discuss key policyrelevant issues around which EPA 

would structure the review. This 

review includes the preparation of an 

Integrated Science Assessment, 

Risk/Exposure Assessment, and a 

Policy Assessment Document by EPA, 

with opportunities for review by EPA’s 

Clean Air Scientific Advisory 

Committee and the public. These 

documents inform the Administrator’s 

decision as to whether to retain or 

revise the standards. 

Statement of Need: 

As established in the Clean Air Act, 

the national ambient air quality 

standards for particulate matter are to 

be reviewed every five years. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 

USC 7409) directs the Administrator to 

propose and promulgate ‘‘primary’’ and 

‘‘secondary’’ national ambient air 

quality standards for pollutants 

identified under section 108 (the 

‘‘criteria’’ pollutants). The ‘‘primary’’ 

standards are established for the 

protection of public health, while 

‘‘secondary’’ standards are to protect 

against public welfare or ecosystem 

effects. 

Alternatives: 

The main alternatives for the 

Administrator’s decision on the review 

of the national ambient air quality 

standards for particulate matter are 

whether to retain or revise the existing 

standards and, if revisions are 

necessary, the forms and levels of the 

revised standards. Options for these 

alternatives will be developed as the 

rulemaking proceeds. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of State 

plans to implement the standards. 

Accordingly, the Agency prepares cost 

and benefit information in order to 

provide States information that may be 

useful in considering different 

implementation strategies for meeting 

proposed or final standards. Cost and 

benefit information is not developed to 

support a NAAQS rulemaking until 

sufficient policy and scientific 

information is available to narrow 

potential options for the form and level 

associated with any potential revisions 

to the standard. Therefore, work on 

developing the plan for conducting the 

cost and benefit analysis will generally 

start 1 1/2 to 2 years following the start 

of a NAAQS review. 

Risks: 

During the course of this review, risk 

assessments will be conducted to 

evaluate health risks associated with 

retention or revision of the particulate 

matter standards. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 11/00/10 

Final Action 07/00/11 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64324 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State, Tribal 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5169; ; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0492 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/ 

Agency Contact: 

Beth Hassett–Sipple 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–4605 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: hassett-sipple.beth@epa.gov 

Karen Martin 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5274 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: martin.karen@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO47 

EPA 

137. REVIEW OF THE PRIMARY 

NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 

STANDARD FOR SULFUR DIOXIDE 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 50 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, November 16, 2009. 

Final, Judicial, June 2, 2010. 

Abstract: 

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is 

required to review and, if appropriate, 

revise the air quality criteria for the 

primary (health-based) and secondary 

(welfare-based) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) every 5 

years. On May 22, 1996, EPA published 

a final decision that revisions of the 

primary and secondary NAAQS for 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) were not 

appropriate at that time, aside from 

several minor technical changes. That 

action provided the Administrator’s 

final determination, after careful 

evaluation of comments received on the 

November 1994 proposal, that 

significant revisions to the primary and 

secondary NAAQS for SO2 would not 

be made at that time. In 2006, EPA’s 

Office of Research and Development 

initiated the current periodic review of 

SO2 air quality criteria, the scientific 

basis for the NAAQS, with a call for 

information in the Federal Register. 

Subsequently, the decision was made 

to separate the reviews of the primary 

and secondary SO2 standards, and to 

combine the SO2 secondary-standard 

review with the secondary-standard 

review of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) due 

to their linkage in terms of effects and 

atmospheric chemistry. That joint 

review of the SO2 and NO2 secondary 

standards is part of a separate 

regulatory action described elsewhere 

in this Regulatory Plan under the 

identifying number (RIN) 2060-AO72. 

The regulatory action described here is 

for the Agency’s review of the primary 

SO2 NAAQS. This review includes the 

preparation of an Integrated Science 

Assessment, Risk/Exposure Assessment, 

and a Policy Assessment. These 

documents were reviewed by EPA’s 

Clean Air Scientific Advisory 

Committee and the public. These 

documents inform the Administrator’s 

proposed decision as to whether to 

retain or revise the standards. 

Statement of Need: 

As established in the Clean Air Act, 

the national ambient air quality 

standards for SO2 are to be reviewed 

every five years. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 

USC 7409) directs the Administrator to 

propose and promulgate ‘‘primary’’ and 

‘‘secondary’’ national ambient air 

quality standards for pollutants 

identified under section 108 (the 

‘‘criteria’’ pollutants). The ‘‘primary’’ 

standards are established for the 

protection of public health, while 

‘‘secondary’’ standards are to protect 

against public welfare or ecosystem 

effects. 

Alternatives: 

The main alternatives for the 

Administrator’s decision on the review 

of the national ambient air quality 

standards for SO2 are whether to retain 

or revise the existing standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of State 

plans to implement the standards. 

Accordingly, the Agency prepares cost 

and benefit information in order to 

provide States information that may be 

useful in considering different 

implementation strategies for meeting 

proposed or final standards. Cost and 

benefit information is not developed to 

support a NAAQS rulemaking until 

sufficient policy and scientific 

information is available to narrow 

potential options for the form and level 

associated with any potential revisions 

to the standard. Therefore, work on the 

developing the plan for conducting the 

cost and benefit analysis will generally 

start 1 1/2 to 2 years following the start 

of a NAAQS review. 

Risks: 

During the course of this review, risk 

assessments were conducted to evaluate 

health risks associated with retention 

or revision of the SO2 standards. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 12/00/09 

Final Action 06/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State, Tribal 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5163; ; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0352 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ 

standards/so2/slso2lindex.html 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64325 

Agency Contact: 

Michael Stewart 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–7524 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: stewart.michael@epa.gov 

Karen Martin 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5274 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: martin.karen@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO48 

EPA 

138. REVIEW OF THE SECONDARY 

NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 

STANDARDS FOR OXIDES OF 

NITROGEN AND OXIDES OF SULFUR 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 50 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, July 12, 2011. 

Final, Judicial, March 20, 2012, No 

court schedule has been ordered for 

this review as of yet. This date 

represents the date submitted by EPA 

to the court. 

Abstract: 

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is 

required to review and, if appropriate, 

revise the air quality criteria for the 

primary (health-based) and secondary 

(welfare-based) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) every 5 

years. On October 11, 1995, EPA 

published a final rule not to revise 

either the primary or secondary 

NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2). On 

May 22, 1996, EPA published a final 

decision that revisions of the primary 

and secondary NAAQS for sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) were not appropriate at 

that time, aside from several minor 

technical changes. On December 9, 

2005, EPA’s Office of Research and 

Development (ORD) initiated the 

current periodic review of NO2 air 

quality criteria with a call for 

information in the Federal Register 

(FR). On May 3, 2006, ORD initiated 

the current periodic review of SO2 air 

quality criteria with a call for 

information in the FR. Subsequently, 

the decision was made to review the 

oxides of nitrogen and the oxides of 

sulfur together, rather than 

individually, with respect to a 

secondary welfare standard for NO2 

and SO2. This decision derives from 

the fact that NO2, SO2, and their 

associated transformation products are 

linked from an atmospheric chemistry 

perspective, as well as from an 

environmental effects perspective, most 

notably in the case of secondary aerosol 

formation and acidification in 

ecosystems. This review includes the 

preparation of an Integrated Science 

Assessment, Risk/Exposure Assessment, 

and a Policy Assessment Document by 

EPA, with opportunities for review by 

EPA’s Clean Air Scientific Advisory 

Committee and the public. These 

documents inform the Administrator’s 

proposed decision as to whether to 

retain or revise the standards. It should 

be noted that this review will be 

limited to only the secondary 

standards; the primary standards for 

SO2 and NO2 are being reviewed 

separately, as described elsewhere in 

this Regulatory Plan under the 

identifying numbers RIN-2060-AO48 

and RIN-2060-AO19, respectively. 

Statement of Need: 

As established in the Clean Air Act, 

the national ambient air quality 

standards for oxides of nitrogen and 

oxides of sulfur are to be reviewed 

every five years. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 

USC 7409) directs the Administrator to 

propose and promulgate ‘‘primary’’ and 

‘‘secondary’’ national ambient air 

quality standards for pollutants 

identified under section 108 (the 

‘‘criteria’’ pollutants). The ‘‘primary’’ 

standards are established for the 

protection of public health, while 

‘‘secondary’’ standards are to protect 

against public welfare or ecosystem 

effects. 

Alternatives: 

The main alternatives for the 

Administrator’s decision on the review 

of the national ambient air quality 

standards for oxides of nitrogen and 

oxides of sulfur are whether to retain 

or revise the existing standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of State 

plans to implement the standards. 

Accordingly, the Agency prepares cost 

and benefit information in order to 

provide States information that may be 

useful in considering different 

implementation strategies for meeting 

proposed or final standards. Cost and 

benefit information is not developed to 

support a NAAQS rulemaking until 

sufficient policy and scientific 

information is available to narrow 

potential options for the form and level 

associated with any potential revisions 

to the standard. Therefore, work on the 

developing the plan for conducting the 

cost and benefit analysis will generally 

start 1 1/2 to 2 years following the start 

of a NAAQS review. 

Risks: 

During the course of this review, risk 

assessments may be conducted to 

evaluate public welfare risks associated 

with retention or revision of the 

NOx/SOx secondary standards. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 02/00/10 

Final Action 11/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State, Tribal 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5170; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1145 

Agency Contact: 

Anne Rea 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C539–02 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–0053 

Fax: 919 541–0905 

Email: rea.anne@epa.gov 

Ginger Tennant 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–4072 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: tennant.ginger@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO72 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64326 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

EPA 

139. CLEAN AIR TRANSPORT RULE 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

Clean Air Act Title I 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

On May 12, 2005, the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated 

the Clean Air Interstate Rule, 

commonly known as CAIR (70 FR 

25162). The CAIR used a cap and trade 

approach to reduce sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) 

emissions. On July 11, 2008, the D.C. 

Circuit issued an opinion finding the 

CAIR unlawful and vacating the rule. 

On December 23, the D.C. Circuit 

issued a decision on the petitions for 

rehearing of the July 11 decision. The 

court granted EPA’s petition for 

rehearing to the extent that it remanded 

the cases without vacatur of the CAIR. 

This ruling means that the CAIR 

remains in place, but that EPA is 

obligated to promulgate another rule 

under Clean Air Act Section 

110(a)(2)(D) consistent with the court’s 

July 11 opinion. This action is 

proposing to fulfill our obligation to 

develop a rule consistent with the July 

11, 2008 and December 23, 2008 D.C. 

Court decisions. 

Statement of Need: 

The Clean Air Transport Rule is 

necessary to help states address 

interstate transport of pollutants from 

upwind states to downwind 

nonattainment areas. Specifically, the 

rule is needed to respond to the 

remand of the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

D.C. Circuit. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

The Clean Air Transport Rule is needed 

to help states address the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean 

Air Act. This section requires States to 

prohibit emissions that contribute 

significantly to downwind 

nonattainment with the national 

ambient air quality standards, or which 

interfere with maintaining the 

standards in those downwind states. 

Alternatives: 

To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

To be determined. 

Risks: 

To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 07/00/10 

Final Action To Be Determined 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined 

Federalism: 

Undetermined 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5336; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491 

Agency Contact: 

Tim Smith 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C539–04 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–4718 

Fax: 919 541–5489 

Email: smith.tim@epamail.epa.gov 

Rhea Jones 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C539–04 

RTP, NC 27709 

Phone: 919 541–2940 

Fax: 919 541–0824 

Email: jones.rhea@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AP50 

EPA 

140. ∑ REVISION TO PB AMBIENT AIR 

MONITORING REQUIREMENTS 

Priority: 

Other Significant 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7403; 42 USC 7410; 42 USC 

7601(a); 42 USC 7611; 42 USC 7619 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 58 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

On November 12, 2008, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 

revised the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead 

and associated monitoring 

requirements. The finalized monitoring 

requirements require state and local 

monitoring agencies to conduct Pb 

monitoring near Pb sources emitting 1.0 

tons per year (tpy) or more and in large 

urban areas referred to as Core Based 

Statistical Areas (CBSA) with a 

population of 500,000 people or more. 

In January 2009, EPA received a 

petition to reconsider the 1.0 tpy 

emission threshold from the Missouri 

Coalition for the Environment 

Foundation, Natural Resources Defense 

Council, the Coalition to End 

Childhood Poisoning, and Physicians 

for Social Responsibility requesting 

EPA reconsider the 1.0 tpy emission 

threshold. EPA granted the petition to 

reconsider on July 22, 2009. This action 

represents the results of the EPA’s 

reconsideration of the Pb monitoring 

requirements. 

Statement of Need: 

This action is in response to a petition 

to reconsider that the Agency received 

and granted on the Pb monitoring 

requirements contained in the revision 

to the Pb NAAQS (73 FR 66964). 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Clean Air Act Title I 

Alternatives: 

To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

To be determined. 

Risks: 

To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Local, State 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5370; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735 

URL For More Information: 

http://epa.gov/air/lead 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64327 

Agency Contact: 

Kevin Cavender 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C304–06 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–2364 

Fax: 919 541–1903 

Email: cavender.kevin@epamail.epa.gov 

Lewis Weinstock 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C304–06 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–3661 

Fax: 919 541–1903 

Email: weinstock.lewis@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AP77 

EPA 

141. ∑ PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT 

DETERIORATION/TITLE V 

GREENHOUSE GAS TAILORING RULE 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

Clean Air Act Title I 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

In this rule, EPA will apply a tailored 

approach to the applicability major 

source thresholds for greenhouse gases 

under the Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and title V 

programs of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) by temporarily raising those 

thresholds and setting a PSD 

significance level for greenhouse gases. 

EPA is anticipating that greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions may soon be subject 

to regulation pursuant to the CAA. 

One consequence of our subjecting 

GHG emissions to regulatory controls 

is that the requirements of existing air 

permit programs, namely the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) preconstruction permitting 

program for major stationary sources 

and the title V operating permits 

program, would be triggered for GHG 

emission sources. At the current 

applicability levels under the CAA, 

tens of thousands of projects every year 

would need permits under the PSD 

program, and millions of sources would 

become subject to the title V program. 

These numbers of permits are orders 

of magnitude greater than the current 

number of permits under these 

permitting programs and would vastly 

exceed the administrative capacity of 

the permitting authorities. By tailoring 

the applicability thresholds, we will 

allow actions to be taken by EPA and 

states to build capacity and streamline 

permitting. 

Statement of Need: 

This action will implement a tailored 

approach to PSD and Title V 

applicability for GHG sources when 

GHG emissions become subject to 

regulation pursuant to the CAA. This 

will avoid the scenario where each year 

tens of thousands of new sources and 

modifications would potentially 

become subject to PSD review and 

millions of sources would require title 

V operating permits, instead replacing 

it with a phased approach that allows 

permitting authorities to manage or 

obtain the necessary resources to 

handle the increased workload. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Doctrine of Administrative Necessity. 

Alternatives: 

Alternatives are being developed and 

will be presented in the preamble to 

the proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

EPA has not completed the necessary 

analytical work that supports 

developing the regulatory relief costs 

savings associated with this rule. Once 

the analysis plan/work is completed, 

the Agency will compile and present 

the information. 

Risks: 

Not yet determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 12/00/09 

Final Action 04/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5192; EPA Docket 

information: EOPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0517 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/nsr 

Agency Contact: 

Joseph Mangino 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–03 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–9778 

Fax: 919 685–3105 

Email: mangino.joseph@epamail.epa.gov 

Jennifer Snyder 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–05 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–3003 

Fax: 919 541–5509 

Email: snyder.jennifer@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AP86 

EPA 

142. ∑ RECONSIDERATION OF THE 

2008 OZONE NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR 

QUALITY STANDARDS 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

Undetermined 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7409 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, December 21, 2009, 

Promised proposal to court by 

12/21/2009. 

Abstract: 

On March 12, 2008, EPA announced 

the final decision on the ozone national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). 

Soon after that decision was signed on 

3/27/08 (73 FR 16436), the Clean Air 

Scientific Advisory Committee 

(CASAC) held an unsolicited public 

meeting and criticized EPA for setting 

primary and secondary standards that 

were not consistent with advice 

provided by the CASAC during review 

of the NAAQS. On 7/25/08, several 

environmental and industry petitioners, 

as well as a number of States, sued EPA 

on the NAAQS decision, and the Court 

set a briefing schedule for the 

consolidated cases on 12/23/08. On 

3/10/09, EPA requested that the Court 

vacate the briefing schedule and hold 

the consolidated cases in abeyance for 

180 days. This request for extension 

was made to allow time for appropriate 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64328 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

EPA officials appointed by the new 

Administration to determine whether 

the standards established in March 

2008 should be maintained, modified 

or otherwise reconsidered. 

Announcement of reconsideration of 

the March 2008 NAAQS decision 

occurred on 9/16/09. The current 

rulemaking schedule calls for a NAAQS 

proposal (including a proposal to stay 

implementation designations for the 

March 2008 NAAQS) to be signed by 

12/15/09, with the final rule to be 

signed by 8/31/10. Reconsideration of 

the NAAQS will be limited to 

information and supporting 

documentation available to EPA and in 

the docket at the time of the March 

2008 decision. 

Statement of Need: 

As established in the Clean Air Act, 

the national ambient air quality 

standards for ozone are to be reviewed 

every five years. As outlined in the 

abstract of this Regulatory Plan entry, 

this reconsideration is in response to 

actions by the courts regarding the last 

review in 2008. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 

USC 7409) directs the Administrator to 

propose and promulgate ‘‘primary’’ and 

‘‘secondary’’ national ambient air 

quality standards for pollutants 

identified under section 108 (the 

‘‘criteria’’ pollutants). The ‘‘primary’’ 

standards are established for the 

protection of public health, while 

‘‘secondary’’ standards are to protect 

against public welfare or ecosystem 

effects. 

Alternatives: 

The main alternatives for the 

Administrator’s decision on the review 

of the national ambient air quality 

standards for ozone are whether to 

reaffirm or revise the existing 

standards. Decisions on these 

alternatives will be summarized in the 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

A regulatory impact analysis (RIA) is 

being prepared that presents the costs 

and benefits associated with the 

proposed revised ozone standards and 

potential alternative standards. This 

RIA will be made available when the 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is 

published. 

Risks: 

The current national ambient air 

quality standards for ozone are 

intended to protect against public 

health risks associated with morbidity 

and/or premature mortality and public 

welfare risks associated with adverse 

vegetation and ecosystem effects. 

During the course of this review, risk 

assessments will be conducted to 

evaluate health and welfare risks 

associated with retention or revision of 

the ozone standards. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 01/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html 

Agency Contact: 

David McKee 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5288 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: mckee.dave@epa.gov 

Karen Martin 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5274 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: martin.karen@epa.gov 

Related RIN: Related to 2060–AN24 

RIN: 2060–AP98 

EPA 

143. ∑ LEAD; CLEARANCE AND 

CLEARANCE TESTING 

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE 

RENOVATION, REPAIR, AND 

PAINTING PROGRAM 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

Undetermined 

Legal Authority: 

15 USC 2601(c); 15 USC 2682(c)(3); 15 

USC 2684; 15 USC 2686; 15 USC 2687 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 745 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, April 22, 2010, 

Signature. 

Final, Judicial, July 15, 2011, Signature. 

Abstract: 

EPA intends to propose several 

revisions to the 2008 Lead Renovation, 

Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) 

rule that established accreditation, 

training, certification, and 

recordkeeping requirements as well as 

work practice standards for persons 

performing renovations for 

compensation in most pre-1978 housing 

and child-occupied facilities. Current 

requirements include training 

renovators, other renovation workers, 

and dust sampling technicians; for 

certifying renovators, dust sampling 

technicians, and renovation firms; for 

accrediting providers of renovation and 

dust sampling technician training; for 

renovation work practices; and for 

recordkeeping. EPA is particularly 

concerned about dust lead hazards 

generated by renovations because 

children, especially younger children, 

are at risk for high exposures of leadbased paint dust via hand-to-mouth 

exposure. For this particular action, 

EPA will consider whether to establish 

additional requirements to ensure that 

renovation work areas are adequately 

cleaned after renovation work is 

finished and before the areas are reoccupied. These additional 

requirements may include dust wipe 

testing after renovations and ensuring 

that renovation work areas meet 

clearance standards before reoccupancy. 

Statement of Need: 

EPA is particularly concerned about 

dust lead hazards generated by 

renovations because children, 

especially younger children, are at risk 

for high exposures of lead-based paint 

dust via hand-to-mouth exposure. This 

rulemaking revision is being considered 

in response to a settlement agreement. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires 

EPA to regulate renovation or 

remodeling activities that create leadbased paint hazards in target housing, 

which is defined by statute to cover 

most pre-1978 housing, public 

buildings built before 1978, and 

commercial buildings. 

Alternatives: 

The additional requirements may 

include dust wipe testing after 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64329 

renovations and ensuring that 

renovation work areas meet clearance 

standards before re-occupancy. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Not yet determined. 

Risks: 

Not yet determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 04/00/10 

Final Action 07/00/11 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Undetermined 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5380 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/ 

renovation.htm 

Agency Contact: 

Cindy Wheeler 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–0484 

Fax: 202 566–0471 

Email: wheeler.cindy@epa.gov 

Michelle Price 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–0744 

Fax: 202 566–0471 

Email: price.michelle@epa.gov 

RIN: 2070–AJ57 

EPA 

144. STANDARDS FOR THE 

MANAGEMENT OF COAL 

COMBUSTION RESIDUALS 

GENERATED BY COMMERCIAL 

ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCERS 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

Undetermined 

Legal Authority: 

Not Yet Determined 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

This action is for the development of 

regulations for coal combustion 

residuals (formerly coal combustion 

waste). The regulations will apply to 

waste management units at facilities 

that manage coal combustion residuals 

generated by steam electric power 

generators, i.e., electric utilities and 

independent power producers. This 

action results from EPA’s regulatory 

determination for fossil fuel 

combustion wastes (see 65 FR 32214, 

May 22, 2000), which concluded that 

waste management regulations under 

RCRA are appropriate for certain coal 

combustion residuals (wastes). The 

intended benefits of this action will be 

to prevent contamination or damage to 

ground waters and surface waters, 

thereby avoiding risk to human health 

and the environment, including 

ecological risks, while monitoring the 

benefits of beneficial use of coal ash 

residues. The Agency issued on August 

29, 2007, a Notice of Data Availability 

(NODA) announcing the availability for 

public inspection and comment of new 

information and data on the 

management of coal combustion wastes 

that the Agency will consider in 

deciding next steps in this effort. The 

comment period for this NODA closed 

on February 11, 2008. EPA is currently 

preparing a proposed rule for the 

regulation of coal combustion residuals. 

Statement of Need: 

There is a need to assess risks 

associated with the management of coal 

combustion residuals and the most 

effective regulatory option to address 

them. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act 

Alternatives: 

To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

To be determined. 

Risks: 

To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NODA 08/29/07 72 FR 49714 

NPRM 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Undetermined 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State, Tribal 

Federalism: 

This action may have federalism 

implications as defined in EO 13132. 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 4470. EPA publication 

information: NODA - 

http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/ cgibin/waisgate.cgi? 

WAISdocID=623368417775 +2+0+0& 

WAISaction=retrieve — This effort will 

also affect Federal, state, local or tribal 

governments that own coal-burning 

commercial electric power generating 

facilities. EPA Docket information: 

EPA-HQ-RCRA-2006-0796 

Sectors Affected: 

221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power 

Generation 

Agency Contact: 

Alexander Livnat 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

5304P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 703 308–7251 

Fax: 703 605–0595 

Email: livnat.alexander@epa.gov 

Steve Souders 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

5306P 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 703 308–8431 

Fax: 703 605–0595 

Email: souders.steve@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2050–AE81 

EPA 

145. CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR 

COOLING WATER INTAKE 

STRUCTURES 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

This action may affect State, local or 

tribal governments and the private 

sector. 

Legal Authority: 

CWA 101; CWA 301; CWA 304; CWA 

308; CWA 316; CWA 401; CWA 402; 

CWA 501; CWA 510 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64330 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 122; 40 CFR 123; 40 CFR 124; 

40 CFR 125 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act 

(CWA) requires EPA to ensure that the 

location, design, construction, and 

capacity of cooling water intake 

structures reflect the best technology 

available (BTA) for minimizing adverse 

environmental impacts. In developing 

regulations to implement section 

316(b), EPA divided its effort into three 

rulemaking phases. Phase II, for 

existing electric generating plants that 

use at least 50 MGD of cooling water, 

was completed in July 2004. Industry 

and environmental stakeholders 

challenged the Phase II regulations. On 

review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Second Circuit remanded several 

key provisions. In July 2007, EPA 

suspended Phase II and has now 

initiated a new 316(b) Phase II 

rulemaking. Following the decision in 

the Second Circuit, several parties 

petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to 

review that decision, and the Supreme 

Court granted the petitions, limited to 

the issue of whether the Clean Water 

Act authorized EPA to consider the 

relationship of costs and benefits in 

establishing section 316(b) standards. 

On April 1, 2009, the Supreme Court 

reversed the Second Circuit, finding 

that the Agency may consider costbenefit analysis in its decision-making. 

This finding did not hold that the 

Agency must consider costs and 

benefits in these decisions. EPA issued 

the Phase III regulation, covering 

existing electric generating plants using 

less than 50 MGD of cooling water, and 

all existing manufacturing facilities, in 

June 2006. EPA will accept a voluntary 

remand of the Phase III regulation for 

existing facilities, in order to issue a 

regulation covering both Phase II and 

III facilities, and to do so in a 

consistent manner. EPA expects this 

new rulemaking will similarly apply to 

the approximately 900 existing electric 

generating and manufacturing plants. 

Statement of Need: 

In the absence of national regulations, 

NPDES permit writers have developed 

requirements to implement section 

316(b) on a case-by-case basis. This 

may result in a range of different 

requirements, and, in some cases, 

delays in permit issuance or reissuance. 

This regulation may have substantial 

ecological benefits. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

The Clean Water Act requires EPA to 

establish best technology available 

standards to minimize adverse 

environmental impacts from cooling 

water intake structures. On February 

16, 2004, EPA took final action on 

regulations governing cooling water 

intake structures at certain existing 

power producing facilities under 

section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act 

(Phase II rule). 69 FR 41576 (July 9, 

2004). These regulations were 

challenged, and the Second Circuit 

remanded several provisions of the 

Phase II rule on various grounds. 

Riverkeeper, Inc. v. EPA, 475 F.3d 83, 

(2d Cir., 2007). EPA suspended most 

of the rule in response to the remand. 

72 FR 37107 (July 9, 2007). The remand 

of Phase III does not change permitting 

requirements for these facilities. Until 

the new rule is issued, permit directors 

continue to issue permits on a caseby-case, Best Professional Judgment 

basis for Phase II facilities. 

Alternatives: 

This analysis will cover various sizes 

and types of potentially regulated 

facilities, and control technologies. EPA 

is considering whether to regulate on 

a national basis, by subcategory, or by 

broad water body category. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The technologies under consideration 

in this rulemaking are similar to the 

technologies considered for the original 

Phase II and Phase III rules. Those costs 

evaluated for the Phase II remanded 

rule, in 2002 dollars, ranged from $389 

million (the final rule option) to $440 

million (the final rule option at 

proposal) to $1 billion to $3.5 billion 

(closed cycle cooling for facilities on 

certain waterbodies, or at all facilities). 

The monetized benefits of the original 

final rule were estimated to be $82 

million. The monetized benefits 

include only the use value associated 

with quantifiable increases in 

commercial and recreational fisheries. 

Non-use benefits were not analyzed. 

The costs and benefits of the Phase III 

option most closely aligned with the 

Phase II option co-promulgated were 

$38.3 million and $2.3 million 

respectively, in 2004 dollars. EPA will 

develop new costs and benefits 

estimates for this new effort. 

Risks: 

Cooling water intake structures may 

pose significant risks for aquatic 

ecosystems. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 09/00/10 

Final Action 07/00/12 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5210; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0667 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/waterscience/316b 

Agency Contact: 

Paul Shriner 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Water 

4303T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–1076 

Email: shriner.paul@epamail.epa.gov 

Jan Matuszko 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Water 

4303T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–1035 

Email: matuszko.jan@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2040–AE95 

EPA 

FINAL RULE STAGE 

146. REVIEW OF THE PRIMARY 

NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY 

STANDARD FOR NITROGEN DIOXIDE 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7408; 42 USC 7409 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 50 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, June 26, 2009. 

Final, Judicial, January 22, 2010. 

Abstract: 

Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is 

required to review and, if appropriate, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64331 

revise the air quality criteria for the 

primary (health-based) and secondary 

(welfare-based) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) every 5 

years. On October 8, 1996, EPA 

published a final rule not to revise 

either the primary or secondary 

NAAQS for nitrogen dioxide (NO2). 

That action provided the 

Administrator’s final determination, 

after careful evaluation of comments 

received on the October 1995 proposal, 

that revisions to neither the primary 

nor the secondary NAAQS for NO2 

were appropriate at that time. On 

December 9, 2005, EPA’s Office of 

Research and Development initiated the 

current periodic review of NO2 air 

quality criteria, the scientific basis for 

the NAAQS, with a call for information 

in the Federal Register. Subsequently, 

the decision was made to separate the 

reviews of the primary and secondary 

NO2 standards, and to combine the 

NO2 secondary-standard review with 

the secondary-standard review of Sulfur 

Dioxide (SO2) due to their linkage in 

terms of effects and atmospheric 

chemistry. That joint review of the SO2 

and NO2 secondary standards is part 

of a separate regulatory action 

described elsewhere in this Regulatory 

Plan under the identifying number RIN2060-AO72. The regulatory action 

described here is for the Agency’s 

review of the primary NO2 NAAQS. 

This includes the preparation of an 

Integrated Science Assessment, 

Risk/Exposure Assessment, and a 

Policy Assessment Document by EPA, 

with opportunities for review by EPA’s 

Clean Air Scientific Advisory 

Committee and the public. These 

documents inform the Administrator’s 

proposed decision as to whether to 

retain or revise the standards. On July 

15, 2009, a proposed rule was 

published that would establish a new, 

short-term (1-hour) standard in the 

range of 80 to 100 parts per billion. 

This action included a proposal to 

revise the NO2 monitoring network to 

include monitors near major roadways. 

Statement of Need: 

As established in the Clean Air Act, 

the national ambient air quality 

standards for NO2 are to be reviewed 

every five years. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 109 of the Clean Air Act (42 

USC 7409) directs the Administrator to 

propose and promulgate ‘‘primary’’ and 

‘‘secondary’’ national ambient air 

quality standards for pollutants 

identified under section 108 (the 

‘‘criteria’’ pollutants). The ‘‘primary’’ 

standards are established for the 

protection of public health, while 

‘‘secondary’’ standards are to protect 

against public welfare or ecosystem 

effects. 

Alternatives: 

The main alternatives for the 

Administrator’s decision on the review 

of the national ambient air quality 

standards for NO2 are whether to retain 

or revise the existing standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of State 

plans to implement the standards. 

Accordingly, the Agency prepares cost 

and benefit information in order to 

provide States information that may be 

useful in considering different 

implementation strategies for meeting 

proposed or final standards. Cost and 

benefit information is not developed to 

support a NAAQS rulemaking until 

sufficient policy and scientific 

information is available to narrow 

potential options for the form and level 

associated with any potential revisions 

to the standard. Therefore, work on the 

developing the plan for conducting the 

cost and benefit analysis will generally 

start 1 1/2 to 2 years following the start 

of a NAAQS review. 

Risks: 

During the course of this review, risk 

assessments will be conducted to 

evaluate health risks associated with 

retention or revision of the NO2 

standards 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 07/15/09 74 FR 34403 

Final Action 02/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, State, Local, Tribal 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5111; EPA publication 

information: NPRM - 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/ 

E9-15944.pdf; EPA Docket information: 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0922 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/air/nitrogenoxides/ 

Agency Contact: 

Scott Jenkins 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C445–01 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–1167 

Email: jenkins.scott@epa.gov 

Karen Martin 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–06 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5274 

Fax: 919 541–0237 

Email: martin.karen@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO19 

EPA 

147. CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM 

NEW MARINE 

COMPRESSION–IGNITION ENGINES 

AT OR ABOVE 30 LITERS PER 

CYLINDER 

Priority: 

Other Significant 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7545; 42 USC 7547 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 80; 40 CFR 94; 40 CFR 1042; 

40 CFR 1065 

Legal Deadline: 

Final, Judicial, December 17, 2009. 

Abstract: 

Category 3 marine diesel engines (those 

with per cylinder displacement greater 

than 30 liters) are very large engines 

that are used for propulsion power in 

ocean-going vessels. Emissions from 

these engines contribute significantly to 

unhealthful levels of ambient 

particulate matter and ozone in many 

parts of the United States. These 

engines are highly mobile and are not 

easily controlled at a state or local 

level. EPA currently regulates 

emissions from Category 3 marine 

diesel engines on ships flagged in the 

United States. This rulemaking will 

consider long-term nitrogen oxides 

(NOx) standards for new Category 3 

marine diesel engines that would 

require the use of high efficiency 

aftertreatment technology. We are 

considering standards equivalent to the 

limits for NOx recently adopted by the 

International Maritime Organization, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64332 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

which are based on the position 

advanced by the United States 

Government as part of the international 

negotiations. We are also considering a 

revision to our diesel fuel program 

under the Act to allow for the 

manufacture and sale of marine diesel 

fuel with a sulfur content up to 1,000 

ppm for use in Category 3 engines. The 

proposal would be part of a 

coordinated strategy, the other 

components of which would consist of 

the new amendments to MARPOL 

Annex VI that will extend these 

standards to foreign vessels (through 

the Act to Prevent Pollution from 

Ships) and pursuing Emission Control 

Area (ECA) designation for U.S. coastal 

areas in accordance with MARPOL 

Annex VI. Implementation of this 

coordinated strategy will ensure that all 

ships that affect U.S. air quality meet 

stringent NOx and fuel sulfur 

requirements. A recent D.C. Circuit 

decision (February 2009) upheld EPA’s 

deadline of 12/17/09 based on EPA’s 

commitment in the regulation to meet 

that deadline for the final Category 3 

rule. 

Statement of Need: 

There is a need to reduce emissions 

from Category 3 marine diesel engines 

to achieve significant public health 

benefits and help states and localities 

attain and maintain PM and ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. These large diesel engines 

generate significant emissions of fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5), Nitrogen 

oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx), 

as well as hydrocarbons (HC), carbon 

monoxide (CO), and hazardous air 

pollutants or air toxics that are 

associated with adverse health effects. 

Without further action, by 2030, NOx 

emissions from ships are projected to 

more than double, growing to 2.1 

million tons a year, while annual 

PM2.5 emissions are expected to almost 

triple to 170,000 tons. By 2030, the 

coordinated strategy described in this 

rule is expected to reduce annual 

emissions of NOx in the United States 

by about 1.2 million tons and 

particulate matter (PM) emissions by 

about 143,000 tons, and prevent 

between 13,000 and 32,000 premature 

deaths annually. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Authority for this regulatory action is 

granted to the Environmental 

Protections Agency by sections 114, 

203, 205, 206, 207, 208, 211, 213, 216, 

and 301(a) of the Clean Air Act as 

amended in 1990 (42 U.S.C. 7414, 

7522, 7524, 7525, 7541, 7542, 7545, 

7547, 7550 and 7601(a)), and by 

sections 1901-1915 of the Act to 

Prevent Pollution from Ships (33 USC 

1909 et seq.). 

The authority for the fuel requirements 

is provided in section 211 (c) of the 

Clean Air Act, which allow EPA to 

regulate fuels that contribute to air 

pollution which endangers public 

health or welfare (42 U.S.C. 7545 (c)). 

Additional support for the procedural 

and enforcement-related aspects of the 

fuel controls in the proposed rule, 

including the record keeping 

requirements, comes from sections 114 

(a) and 301 (a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 

Sections 7414 (a) and 7601 (a)). The 

authority for the engine requirements 

is provided in section 213(a)(3) of the 

Clean Air Act, which directs the 

Administrator to set standards 

regulating emissions of NOx, volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs), or CO for 

classes or categories of engines, like 

marine diesel engines, that contribute 

to ozone or carbon monoxide 

concentrations in more than one 

nonattainment area. Section 208, which 

requires manufacturers and other 

persons subject to Title II requirements 

to ‘‘provide information the 

Administrator may reasonably require . 

. . to otherwise carry out the provisions 

of this part. . . ’’ provides authority 

for a PM measurement requirement. 

The authority to implement and enforce 

the Category 3 marine diesel emission 

standard is provided in Section 213(d) 

which specifies that the standards EPA 

adopts for marine diesel engines ‘‘shall 

be subject to Sections 206, 207, 208, 

and 209 of the Clean Air Act, with such 

modifications that the Administrator 

deems appropriate to the regulations 

implementing these sections.’’ In 

addition, the marine standards ‘‘shall 

be enforced in the same manner as 

[motor vehicle] standards prescribed 

under section 202’’ of the Act. Section 

213 (d) also grants EPA authority to 

promulgate or revise regulations as 

necessary to determine compliance 

with and enforce standards adopted 

under section 213. Authority to 

implement MARPOL Annex VI is 

provided in section 1903 of the Act to 

Prevent Pollution from Ships (APPS). 

Section 1903 gives the Administrator 

the authority to prescribe any necessary 

or desired regulations to carry out the 

provisions of Regulations 12 through 19 

of Annex VI. 

Alternatives: 

Several alternatives were considered as 

part of this rulemaking, including a 

mandatory cold ironing requirement; 

earlier adoption of the Tier 3 NOx 

limits; and standards for existing 

engines, including a mandatory 

remanufacture program, the MARPOL 

Annex VI program for existing engines, 

and a Voluntary Marine Verification 

Program. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

A benefit-cost analysis was performed 

for the entire coordinated strategy that 

involves this rulemaking and the 

international agreements described 

above. Specifically, the estimated 

annual benefits of the coordinated 

strategy range between $110 and $280 

billion annually in 2030 using a three 

percent discount rate, or between $100 

and $260 billion assuming a 7 percent 

discount rate, compared to estimated 

social costs of approximately $3.1 

billion in that same year. Though there 

are a number of health and 

environmental effects associated with 

the coordinated strategy that we are 

unable to quantify or monetize, the 

projected benefits of the coordinated 

strategy far outweigh the projected 

costs. Using a conservative benefits 

estimate, the 2030 benefits are expected 

to outweigh the costs by at least a 

factor of 32 and could be as much as 

a factor of 90. 

Risks: 

The failure to set new tiers of standards 

for Category 3 marine diesel engines 

risks continued increases in exposure 

to elevated levels of ambient ozone and 

particulate matter emissions, 

particularly for populations in port 

areas and along coastal waterways but 

also for populations located well 

inland. These elevated levels risk 

additional premature mortality and 

other health and environmental impacts 

that could otherwise be avoided. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM 12/07/07 72 FR 69521 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End 

03/06/08 

NPRM 08/28/09 74 FR 44441 

NPRM Comment 

Period End 

09/28/09 

Final Action 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64333 

International Impacts: 

This regulatory action will be likely to 

have international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5129. EPA publication 

information: ANPRM - 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/2007/December/Day07/a23556.htm — EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0121 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/otaq/oceanvessels.htm 

Agency Contact: 

Jean Revelt 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

OAR/OTAQ/ASD 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Phone: 734 214–4822 

Fax: 734 214–4050 

Email: revelt.jean-marie@epa.gov 

Michael Samulski 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

OAR/OTAQ/ASD 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Phone: 734 214–4532 

Fax: 734 214–4816 

Email: samulski.michael@epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO38 

EPA 

148. RENEWABLE FUELS STANDARD 

PROGRAM 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

This action may affect the private 

sector under PL 104-4. 

Legal Authority: 

Clean Air Act Section 211(o) 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 86; 40 CFR 80 

Legal Deadline: 

Final, Statutory, December 19, 2008. 

Abstract: 

This rulemaking will implement 

provisions in Title II of the 2007 Energy 

Independence and Security Act (EISA) 

that amend Section 211(o) of the Clean 

Air Act. The amendments revise the 

National Renewable Fuels Standard 

Program in the United States, 

increasing the national requirement to 

a total of 36 billion gallons of total 

renewable fuel in 2022. Application of 

the new standards now apply to diesel 

fuel producers in addition to gasoline 

producers and to nonroad fuels in 

addition to highway fuels. The new 

requirements also establish new 

renewable fuel categories and specific 

volume standards for cellulosic and 

advanced renewable fuels, biomass 

based diesel and total renewable fuels. 

Further, the amendments establish new 

eligibility requirements for meeting the 

renewable fuel standards including 

application of a specific definition for 

biomass, restrictions on what land 

feedstocks can come from and establish 

minimum lifecycle greenhouse gas 

reduction thresholds for the various 

categories of renewable fuels. 

Statement of Need: 

This action is directed by the 2007 

Energy Independence and Security Act. 

It requires EPA to implement the 

amendments to Clean Air Act Section 

211(o) - The Renewable Fuels Standard 

Program. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Clean Air Act Section 211(o). 

Alternatives: 

A notice of proposed rulemaking was 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 26, 2009. The proposal includes 

a number of proposed approaches as 

well as alternative approaches to 

implement the new standards. The 

public comment period will close on 

September 25, 2009. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The economic analyses that support the 

proposed rule do not reflect all of the 

potentially quantifiable economic 

impacts. There are several key impacts 

that remain incomplete as a result of 

time and resource constraints necessary 

to complete the proposed rule, 

including the economic impact analysis 

and the air quality and health impacts 

analysis (see Section II.B.3). As a result, 

this proposal does not combine 

economic impacts in an attempt to 

compare costs and benefits, in order to 

avoid presenting an incomplete and 

potentially misleading characterization. 

For the final rule, when the planned 

analyses are complete and current 

analyses updated, we will provide a 

consistent cost-benefit comparison. 

However, the following is offered in 

reflection of some of the benefits and 

costs associated with certain aspects of 

the proposed rule. Initial estimates 

indicate that the expanded use of 

renewable fuels will result in a 

reduction of 6.8 billion tons of CO2 

equivalent GHG emissions in 2022. 

This is equivalent to removing about 

24 million vehicles off the road. Also, 

36 billion gallons of renewable fuel will 

displace about 15 billion gallons of 

petroleum-based gasoline and diesel 

fuel, which represents about 11% of 

annual gasoline and diesel 

consumption in 2022. Total energy 

security benefits associated with a 

reduction of U.S. imported oil is 

$12.38/barrel. Based upon the 

$12.38/barrel figure, total energy 

security benefits associated with this 

proposal were calculated at $3.7 

billion. Increases in gasoline and diesel 

fuel costs are equivalent to $4 billion 

to $18 billion in 2022. Estimates on 

U.S. food costs would increase by $10 

per person per year by 2022 while net 

U.S. farm income would increase by 

$7.1 billion dollars (10.6%). 

Risks: 

Analysis of criteria and toxic emission 

impacts is performed relative to several 

different reference cases. Overall we 

project the proposed program will 

result in significant increases in ethanol 

and acetaldehyde emissions. We project 

more modest but still significant 

increases in acrolein, NOx, 

formaldehyde and PM. However, we 

project today’s action will result in 

decreased ammonia emissions (due to 

reductions in livestock agricultural 

activity), decreased CO emissions 

(driven primarily by the impacts of 

ethanol on exhaust emissions from 

vehicles and nonroad equipment), and 

decreased benzene emissions (due to 

displacement of gasoline with ethanol 

in the fuel pool). Discussion and a 

breakdown of these results by the fuel 

production / distribution and vehicle 

and equipment emissions are presented 

in the NPRM. The aggregate nationwide 

emission inventory impacts presented 

here will likely lead to health impacts 

throughout the U.S. due to changes in 

future-year ambient air quality. 

However, emissions changes alone are 

not a good indication of local or 

regional air quality and health impacts, 

as there may be highly localized 

impacts such as increased emissions 

from ethanol plants and evaporative 

emissions from cars, and decreased 

emissions from gasoline refineries. For 

the final rule, a national-scale air 

quality modeling analysis will be 

performed to analyze the impacts of the 

proposed standards. Further, as the 

production of biofuels increases to meet 

the requirements of this proposed rule, 

there may be adverse impacts on both 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64334 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

water quality and quantity. Increased 

production of biofuels may lead to 

increased application of fertilizer and 

pesticides and increased soil erosion, 

which could impact water quality. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 05/26/09 74 FR 24903 

NPRM Comment 

Period End 

07/27/09 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended 

07/07/09 74 FR 32091 

NPRM Extended 

Comment Period 

End 

09/25/09 

Final Action 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Yes 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

International Impacts: 

This regulatory action will be likely to 

have international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5250. EPA publication 

information: NPRM - 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2009/pdf/ 

E9-10978.pdf — EPA Docket 

information: EPA—HQ— OAR—2005— 

0161 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

renewablefuels/index.htmιnotices 

Agency Contact: 

Paul Argyropoulos 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

6520J ARN 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 564–1123 

Fax: 202 564–1686 

Email: argyropoulos.paul@epa.gov 

David Korotney 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

AAFC 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Phone: 734 214–4507 

Email: korotney.david@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AO81 

EPA 

149. ENDANGERMENT AND CAUSE 

OR CONTRIBUTE FINDINGS FOR 

GREENHOUSE GASES UNDER 

SECTION 202(A) OF THE CLEAN AIR 

ACT 

Priority: 

Other Significant 

Legal Authority: 

42 USC 7521(a) 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

On April 24, 2009, the Administrator 

published a proposed Endangerment 

Finding under section 202(a) of the 

Clean Air Act. This proposed finding 

had two components. First, the 

Administrator proposed to find that the 

current and projected concentrations of 

the mix of six key greenhouse gases - 

carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), 

nitrous oxide (N2O), 

hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), 

perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur 

hexafluoride (SF6) - in the atmosphere 

endanger the public health and welfare 

of current and future generations 

through climate change. In the second 

component of the proposal, known as 

the Cause or Contribute Finding, the 

Administrator further proposed to find 

that the combined emissions of four of 

these six greenhouse gases from new 

motor vehicles and motor vehicle 

engines contribute to the atmospheric 

concentrations of these key greenhouse 

gases and hence to the threat of climate 

change. EPA has not proposed in this 

action any new regulation of motor 

vehicle or motor vehicle emissions. 

Statement of Need: 

This action responds to the Supreme 

Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. 

EPA, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), in which the 

court found that greenhouse gases are 

air pollutants under the CAA. The 

Court held that the Administrator must 

determine whether or not emissions of 

greenhouse gases from new motor 

vehicles and new motor vehicle engines 

cause or contribute to air pollution 

which may reasonably be anticipated to 

endanger public health or welfare, or 

whether the science is too uncertain to 

make a reasoned decision. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

The legal basis is Section 202(a) of the 

Clean Air Act. 

Alternatives: 

Not yet determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

This action does not include any 

proposed standards and does not itself 

impose any requirements on industry 

or other entities. 

Risks: 

The effects of climate change observed 

to date and projected to occur in the 

future include, but are not limited to, 

more frequent and intense heat waves, 

more severe wildfires, degraded air 

quality, more heavy downpours and 

flooding, increased drought, greater sea 

level rise, more intense storms, harm 

to water resources, harm to agriculture, 

and harm to wildlife and ecosystems. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Proposal 04/24/09 74 FR 18886 

Final 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

Previously reported as RIN 2060-ZA14. 

SAN No. 5335; EPA publication 

information: Proposal - 

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPAAIR/2009/April/Day-24/a9339.pdf. EPA 

Docket information: EPA-HQ-OAR2009-0171 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/climatechange/ 

endangerment.html 

Agency Contact: 

Rona Birnbaum 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

6207J 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 343–9076 

Fax: 202 565–2140 

Email: birnbaum.rona@epamail.epa.gov 

Ben DeAngelo 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

6207J 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 343–9107 

Email: deangelo.ben@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AP55 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64335 

EPA 

150. ∑ EPA/NHTSA JOINT 

RULEMAKING TO ESTABLISH 

LIGHT–DUTY GREENHOUSE GAS 

EMISSION STANDARDS AND 

CORPORATE AVERAGE FUEL 

ECONOMY STANDARDS 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

Undetermined 

Legal Authority: 

Clean Air Act Section 202(a) 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

EPA plans to set national emissions 

standards under section 202 (a) of the 

Clean Air Act to control greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions from passenger cars 

and light-duty trucks, and mediumduty passenger vehicles, as part of a 

joint rulemaking with National 

Highway Traffic and Safety 

Administration (NHTSA). This joint 

rulemaking effort was announced by 

President Obama on May 19, 2009. The 

GHG standards would significantly 

reduce the GHG emissions from these 

light-duty vehicles. The standards 

would be phased in beginning with the 

2012 model year through model year 

2016. EPA and NHTSA expect to 

propose the rules by late summer 2009. 

EPA’s final action would only occur if 

EPA determines that emissions of 

greenhouse gases may reasonably be 

anticipated to endanger public health 

or welfare, and that emissions from 

new motor vehicles and motor vehicle 

engines contribute to the atmospheric 

concentrations of these greenhouse 

gases and hence to the threat of climate 

change. EPA has already proposed 

these findings. (74 FR 18886; April 24, 

2009) 

Statement of Need: 

EPA recently proposed to find that 

emissions of greenhouse gases from 

new motor vehicles and engines cause 

or contribute to air pollution that may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger 

public health and welfare. Therefore, 

there is a need to reduce GHG 

emissions from light-duty vehicles to 

protect public health and welfare. The 

light-duty vehicle sector, which 

includes passenger cars, light-duty 

trucks, and medium-duty passenger 

vehicles, accounts for approximately 

60% of all U.S. transportation sector 

GHG emissions. This rulemaking would 

significantly reduce GHG emissions 

from model year 2012 through 2016 

light-duty vehicles. This rulemaking is 

also consistent with the National Fuel 

Efficiency Policy announced by 

President Obama on May 19, 2009, 

responding to the country’s critical 

need to address global climate change 

and reduce oil consumption. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 202(a)(1) provides broad 

authority to regulate new ‘‘motor 

vehicles,’’ which include light duty 

vehicles, light-duty trucks, and 

medium-duty passenger vehicles 

(hereafter light vehicles). While other 

provisions of Title II address specific 

model years and emissions of motor 

vehicles, section 202(a)(1) provides the 

authority that EPA would use to 

regulate GHGs from new light vehicles. 

Section 202(a)(1) states ‘‘the 

Administrator shall by regulation 

prescribe (and from time to time 

revise). . . standards applicable to the 

emission of any air pollutant from any 

class or classes of new motor vehicles 

. . . , which in his judgment cause, 

or contribute to, air pollution which 

may reasonably be anticipated to 

endanger public health or welfare.’’ 

Any such standards ‘‘shall be 

applicable to such vehicles . . . for their 

useful life.’’ Finalizing the light vehicle 

regulations would be contingent upon 

EPA finalizing both the endangerment 

finding and cause or contribute finding 

that emissions of GHGs from new 

motor vehicles and motor vehicle 

engines cause or contribute to air 

pollution that may reasonably be 

anticipated to endanger public health 

and welfare. 

Alternatives: 

The rulemaking proposal will include 

an evaluation of regulatory alternatives 

that can be considered in addition to 

the Agency’s primary proposal. In 

addition, the proposal is expected to 

include tools such as averaging, 

banking and trading of emissions 

credits as alternative approaches for 

compliance with the proposed program. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

According to EPA’s preliminary 

analysis, the standards under 

consideration are projected to reduce 

GHGs by approximately 900 million 

metric tons and save 1.8 billion barrels 

of oil over the life of the program for 

MY 2012 — 2016 vehicles. The 

program would reduce GHG emissions 

from the U.S. light-duty fleet by 19 

percent by 2030. EPA estimates an 

average increased cost of about $1,300 

per vehicle in 2016 compared to 

today’s vehicles. However, the typical 

driver would save enough in lower fuel 

costs over the first three years to offset 

the higher vehicle cost. Over the life 

of a vehicle, drivers would save about 

$2,800 through the fuel savings that 

come from controlling GHG emissions. 

Detailed analysis of economy-wide cost 

impacts, greenhouse gas emission 

reductions, and societal benefits will be 

performed during the rulemaking 

process. 

Risks: 

GHG emissions from light-duty vehicles 

are responsible for almost 60 percent 

of all U.S. transportation-related GHGs, 

and increase the risk of unacceptable 

climate change impacts. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 09/28/09 74 FR 49454 

NPRM Comment 

Period End 

11/27/09 

Final Action 03/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5344; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0472 

Agency Contact: 

Robin Moran 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

ASD 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Phone: 734 214–4781 

Fax: 734 214–4816 

Email: moran.robin@epamail.epa.gov 

Chris Lieske 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

ASD 

Ann Arbor, MI 48105 

Phone: 734 214–4584 

Fax: 734 214–4816 

Email: lieske.christopher@epamail.epa.gov 

Related RIN: Related to 2127–AK50 

RIN: 2060–AP58 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64336 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

EPA 

151. ∑ PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT 

DETERIORATION (PSD): 

RECONSIDERATION OF 

INTERPRETATION OF REGULATIONS 

THAT DETERMINE POLLUTANTS 

COVERED BY THE FEDERAL PSD 

PERMIT PROGRAM 

Priority: 

Other Significant 

Legal Authority: 

Administrative Procedure Act sec 

553(e) 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

This action concerns the EPA’s 

interpretation of the regulatory phrase 

‘‘subject to regulation’’ as it applies to 

the federal Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) program (more 

specifically, in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)). At 

issue is a December 18, 2008, 

memorandum, titled ‘‘EPA’s 

Interpretation of Regulations that 

Determine Pollutants Covered By 

Federal Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program,’’ 

which specified that a pollutant is only 

‘‘subject to regulation’’ when its 

emissions are actually controlled or 

limited under a provision of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) or a final EPA rule 

issued under the authority of the CAA. 

Following issuance of the memo, EPA 

received a petition for reconsideration 

from the Sierra Club and several other 

organizations. The petitioners argued 

that EPA’s issuance of the Memo 

violated the procedural requirements of 

the Administrative Procedures Act and 

the CAA, and the Memo’s 

interpretation conflicted with prior 

agency actions. On February 17, 2009, 

the Administrator granted 

reconsideration on the December 18, 

2008, memorandum in order to allow 

for public comment on the issues raised 

in the Memo and in a related decision 

of the Environmental Appeals Board 

(EAB). Thus, EPA will proceed with a 

reconsideration proceeding and 

conduct rulemaking regarding the 

proper interpretation of this regulatory 

phrase. 

Statement of Need: 

This rulemaking is needed to ensure a 

common understanding of when a new 

pollutant becomes ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’ and thereby subject to PSD 

permitting requirements. In light of the 

petitioners’ request, EPA believes that 

soliciting comment on the December 

18, 2008, interpretation, as well as 

other feasible options, is warranted. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

APA 553(e). 

Alternatives: 

Not yet determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Not yet determined. 

Risks: 

Not yet determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 10/07/09 74 FR 51535 

Final Action 03/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5377 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/nsr 

Agency Contact: 

Dave Svendsgaard 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–03 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–2380 

Fax: 919 685–3105 

Email: svendsgaard.dave@epamail.epa.gov 

Raj Rao 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Air and Radiation 

C504–02 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: 919 541–5344 

Fax: 919 541–5509 

Email: rao.raj@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2060–AP87 

EPA 

152. ∑ LEAD; AMENDMENT TO THE 

OPT–OUT AND RECORDKEEPING 

PROVISIONS IN THE RENOVATION, 

REPAIR, AND PAINTING PROGRAM 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: 

This action may affect the private 

sector under PL 104-4. 

Legal Authority: 

15 USC 2601(c); 15 USC 2682(c)(3); 15 

USC 2684; 15 USC 2686; 15 USC 2687 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 745 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, October 20, 2009, 

Signature. 

Final, Judicial, April 22, 2010, 

Signature. 

Abstract: 

EPA intends to propose several 

revisions to the 2008 Lead Renovation, 

Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) 

rule that established accreditation, 

training, certification, and 

recordkeeping requirements as well as 

work practice standards on persons 

performing renovations for 

compensation in most pre-1978 housing 

and child-occupied facilities. This 

particular action will involve proposing 

amendments to the opt-out provision 

that currently exempts a renovator from 

the training and work practice 

requirements of the rule where he or 

she obtains a certification from the 

owner of a residence he or she occupies 

that no child under age 6 or pregnant 

women resides in the home and the 

home is not a child-occupied facility. 

EPA will propose revisions that involve 

renovation firms providing the owner 

with a copy of the records they are 

currently required to maintain to 

demonstrate compliance with the 

training and work practice 

requirements of the RRP rule and, if 

different, providing the information to 

the occupant of the building being 

renovated or the operator of the childoccupied facility. EPA will also 

propose various minor amendments to 

the regulations concerning applications 

for training provider accreditation, 

amending accreditations, course 

completion certificates, recordkeeping, 

State and Tribal program requirements, 

and grandfathering (i.e., taking a 

refresher training in lieu of the initial 

training). In addition, the proposed 

amendments intend to clarify that 

certain requirements apply to the RRP 

rule as well as the Lead-based Paint 

Activities (abatement) regulations, that 

a certified inspector or risk assessor can 

act as a dust sampling technician, 

which hands-on training topics are 

required for renovator and dust 

sampling technician courses, and 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64337 

requirements for States and Tribes that 

apply to become authorized to 

implement the RRP program. 

Statement of Need: 

This rulemaking revisions is being 

considered in response to a settlement 

agreement. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires 

EPA to regulate renovation or 

remodeling activities that create leadbased paint hazards in target housing, 

which is defined by statute to cover 

most pre-1978 housing, public 

buildings built before 1978, and 

commercial buildings. 

Alternatives: 

The original proposal considered 

several options on these points. In 

addition, EPA will identify other 

alternatives to evaluate. The 

alternatives were not, however, 

available at the time that this form was 

completed. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Under development and not available 

at the time that this form was 

completed. 

Risks: 

Under development and not available 

at the time that this form was 

completed. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 10/28/09 74 FR 55506 

NPRM Comment 

Period End 

11/27/09 

Final Action 04/00/10 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

Yes 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses 

Government Levels Affected: 

None 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5379 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/ 

renovation.htm 

Agency Contact: 

Marc Edmonds 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–0758 

Fax: 202 566–0741 

Email: edmonds.marc@epa.gov 

Michelle Price 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic 

Substances 

7404T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–0744 

Fax: 202 566–0471 

Email: price.michelle@epa.gov 

RIN: 2070–AJ55 

EPA 

153. REVISIONS TO THE SPILL 

PREVENTION, CONTROL, AND 

COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC) RULE 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

33 USC 1321 

CFR Citation: 

40 CFR 112 

Legal Deadline: 

None 

Abstract: 

On December 5, 2008, EPA amended 

the Spill Prevention, Control, and 

Countermeasure (SPCC) rule to provide 

increased clarity with respect to 

specific regulatory requirements, to 

tailor requirements to particular 

industry sectors, and to streamline 

certain rule requirements. The Agency 

subsequently delayed the effective date 

of these amendments to January 14, 

2010 to allow the Agency time to 

review the amendments to ensure that 

they properly reflect consideration of 

all relevant facts. EPA also requested 

public comment on the delay of the 

effective date and its duration, and on 

the December 2008 amendments. EPA 

is reviewing the record for the 

amendments and the additional 

comments to determine if any changes 

are warranted. 

Statement of Need: 

The final rule is necessary to clarify 

the regulatory obligations of SPCC 

facility owners and operators and to 

reduce the regulatory burden where 

appropriate. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

33 USC 1321 et seq. 

Alternatives: 

EPA considered alternative options for 

various aspects of this final rule, 

following receipt of public comments. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The principal effect of the final 

amendments would be lower 

compliance costs for owners and 

operators of certain types of facilities 

and equipment. Preliminary cost 

savings for this rulemaking effort is 

estimated to be between $92-100 

million. 

Risks: 

In the absence of quantitative 

information on the change in risk 

related to the specific proposed 

amendments, EPA conducted a 

qualitative assessment, which suggests 

that the final amendments will not lead 

to a significant increase in oil discharge 

risk. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice Clarifying 

Certain Issues 

05/25/04 69 FR 29728 

NPRM 1–Year 

Compliance 

Extension 

06/17/04 69 FR 34014 

Final 18 Months 

Compliance 

Extension 

08/11/04 69 FR 48794 

NODA : Certain 

Facilities 

09/20/04 69 FR 56184 

NODA: Oil–Filled and 

Process Equipment 

09/20/04 69 FR 56182 

NPRM 10/15/07 72 FR 58377 

Final Action 12/05/08 73 FR 74236 

Notice to Delay 

Effective Date 

02/03/09 74 FR 5900 

Delay of Effective 

Date 

04/01/09 74 FR 14736 

Final Action #2 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

No 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State, Tribal 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 2634.2; EPA publication 

information: Notice Clarifying Certain 

Issues - http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/ 

cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi? dbname=2004 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
64338 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 

lregister &docid=fr25my04-49.pdf; 

Split from RIN 2050-AC62.; EPA Docket 

information: EPA-HQ-OPA-2007-0584 

URL For More Information: 

www.epa.gov/oilspill/spcc.htm 

Agency Contact: 

Vanessa Principe 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

5104A 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 564–7913 

Fax: 202 564–2625 

Email: principe.vanessa@epa.gov 

RIN: 2050–AG16 

EPA 

154. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS 

GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR 

THE CONSTRUCTION AND 

DEVELOPMENT POINT SOURCE 

CATEGORY 

Priority: 

Economically Significant. Major under 

5 USC 801. 

Legal Authority: 

CWA 301; CWA 304; CWA 306; CWA 

501 

CFR Citation: 

Not Yet Determined 

Legal Deadline: 

NPRM, Judicial, December 1, 2008, FR 

Publication by 12/1/2008 as per 

12/5/2006 Court Order. 

Final, Judicial, December 1, 2009, FR 

Publication by 12/1/2009 as per 

12/5/2006 Court Order. 

Abstract: 

In a November 28, 2008 proposed 

rulemaking, EPA proposed to establish 

effluent limitations guidelines (ELGs) 

and new source performance standards 

(NSPSs) for the Construction and 

Development point source category. 

This rulemaking and its schedule 

respond to a court order that requires 

the Agency to publish final regulations 

by December 1, 2009. The ELGs and 

NSPSs would control the discharge of 

pollutants such as sediment, turbidity, 

nutrients and metals in discharges from 

construction activities and will be 

implemented through the issuance of 

NPDES permits. EPA solicited 

comments on a range of erosion and 

sediment control measures and 

pollution prevention measures. The 

proposed requirements vary by size of 

the construction site and by other 

factors, such as rainfall intensity and 

clay content of soil. The proposed rule 

was intended to work in concert with 

existing state and local programs, 

adding a technology-based ‘‘floor’’ that 

establishes minimum requirements that 

would apply nationally. Once 

implemented, these new requirements 

would significantly reduce the amount 

of sediment, turbidity, and other 

pollutants discharged from construction 

sites. 

Statement of Need: 

Despite substantial improvements in 

the nation’s water quality since the 

inception of the Clean Water Act, 45 

percent of assessed river and stream 

miles, 47 percent of assessed lake acres, 

and 32 percent of assessed square miles 

of estuaries show impairments from a 

wide range of sources. Improper control 

of stormwater discharges from 

construction activity is among the 

many contributors to remaining water 

quality problems throughout the United 

States. Sediment is one of the primary 

pollutants that cause water quality 

impairment for streams and rivers. 

Construction generates significantly 

higher loads of sediment per acre than 

other sources. The rulemaking would 

constitute the nationally applicable, 

technology-based ELGs and NSPS 

applicable to all dischargers required to 

obtain a National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System (NPDES) permit. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

The Clean Water Act authorizes EPA 

to establish ELGs and NSPS to limit 

the pollutants discharged from point 

sources. In addition, EPA is bound by 

the district court decision, in NRDC v. 

EPA, 437 F.Supp.2d 1137, (C.D. 

Cal.2006), to propose ELGs and NSPS 

for the construction and development 

industry by December 1, 2008 and to 

promulgate ELGs and NSPS as soon as 

practicable, but in no event later than 

December 1, 2009. 

Alternatives: 

The Clean Water Act directs EPA to 

establish a technology basis for the 

ELGs and NSPS, which are based on 

the performance of specific technology 

levels, such as the best available 

technology economically achievable. 

EPA is considering a range of pollution 

control approaches and technologies, 

and is also considering waivers based 

on construction site size, rainfall, and 

soil erosivity to reduce the impact on 

small dischargers. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

The annualized social costs of the 

proposed rulemaking were estimated to 

range from $141 million to $3.8 billion, 

and the annualized monetized benefits 

were estimated to range from $11 

million to $327 million. The costs 

include compliance costs, 

administrative costs, and partial 

equilibrium estimates of quantity 

effects and deadweight loss to society. 

The monetized benefit categories 

include avoided costs of dredging for 

navigation and water storage, avoided 

costs of drinking water treatment, and 

monetizable water quality benefits. 

These costs may change in the final 

rule. 

Risks: 

Sediment is currently one of the 

primary pollutants that cause water 

quality impairment for streams and 

rivers and present a risk to aquatic life. 

The ELGs and NSPS are expected to 

result in a reduction of the discharge 

of pollutants to surface waters, 

primarily as sediment and turbidity. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM 11/28/08 73 FR 72561 

NPRM Comment 

Period End 

02/26/09 

Final Action 12/00/09 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: 

No 

Small Entities Affected: 

Businesses, Governmental Jurisdictions 

Government Levels Affected: 

Federal, Local, State 

Additional Information: 

SAN No. 5119; EPA publication 

information: NPRM - 

http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/ 

E8-27848.pdf; EPA Docket information: 

EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0465 

URL For More Information: 

http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/ 

guide/construction/ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 233 / Monday, December 7, 2009 / The Regulatory Plan 64339 

Agency Contact: 

Jesse Pritts 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Water 

4303T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–1038 

Fax: 202 566–1053 

Email: pritts.jesse@epamail.epa.gov 

Janet Goodwin 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Water 

4303T 

Washington, DC 20460 

Phone: 202 566–1060 

Email: goodwin.janet@epamail.epa.gov 

RIN: 2040–AE91 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES