29126 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 29, 2001 / Notices

ADDRESSES: 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,

NW., MC 6202J, Washington, DC 20460.

Interested persons may obtain a copy of

the ICR without charge by writing to the

above address or downloading it off the

Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr and

refer to EPA ICR No. 1736.02.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

Gunning at EPA’s Natural Gas STAR

Program by phone at (202) 564–9736, by

email at gunning.paul@epa.gov, or by

fax at (202) 565–2254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected Entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are those which

produce, process, transport, and

distribute natural gas.

Title: ‘‘Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements Under EPA’s Natural Gas

STAR Program’’, EPA ICR Number

1736.02, OMB Control Number 2060–

0328, expiring on 9/30/2001.

Abstract: Natural Gas STAR is an

EPA-sponsored, voluntary program that

encourages natural gas companies to

adopt cost effective methods for

reducing methane emissions. Natural

Gas STAR Partners agree to implement

cost-effective Best Management

Practices, which will save participants

money and improve environmental

quality. EPA needs to collect

information to establish program

participation and to obtain general

information on new Natural Gas STAR

Partners. EPA also uses the information

collection to evaluate a Partner’s

progress and performance, assess overall

program results, and develop technical

guidance documents for the benefit of

the industry. Information collection is

accomplished through the use of an

annual reporting process that allows

companies to report their

accomplishments in either a traditional

hard-copy format or electronically.

Participation in Natural Gas STAR is

voluntary. Natural Gas STAR Partners

may designate information submitted

under this ICR as confidential business

information. EPA will treat all such

information as confidential business

information and will not make the

company or agency-specific information

collected under this ICR available to the

general public. An agency may not

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not

required to respond to, a collection of

information unless it displays a

currently valid OMB control number.

The OMB control numbers for EPA’s

regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9

and 48 CFR chapter 15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submission of responses.

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 47 hours per

facility. Burden means the total time,

effort, or financial resources expended

by persons to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide information to or

for a Federal agency. This includes the

time needed to review instructions;

develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes

of collecting, validating, and verifying

information, processing and

maintaining information, and disclosing

and providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: 90.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

90.

Frequency of Response: varies.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

4,230 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden: $310,002.

Dated: May 11, 2001.

Kathleen Hogan,

Director, Climate Protection Partnership

Division.

[FR Doc. 01–13419 Filed 5–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[IN 130; FRL–6984–5]

Adequacy Status of Lake and Porter

Counties, Indiana Submitted Ozone

Attainment Demonstration and Post

1999 Rate of Progress Plan for

Transportation Conformity Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy.

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is

notifying the public that EPA has found

that the motor vehicle emissions

budgets in the Lake and Porter Counties,

Indiana (Northwest Indiana) ozone

attainment demonstration and post 1999

Rate of Progress (ROP) plan are adequate

for conformity purposes. These

documents contain motor vehicle

emission budgets for VOC for 2002,

2005, and 2007 and for NOX for 2007.

On March 2, 1999, the D.C. Circuit

Court ruled that submitted State

Implementation Plans (SIPs) cannot be

used for conformity determinations

until EPA has affirmatively found them

adequate. As a result of our finding,

Northwest Indiana can use the motor

vehicle emissions budgets from the

submitted ozone attainment

demonstration and the submitted post

1999 ROP plan for future conformity

determinations. These budgets are

effective June 13, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The

finding and the response to comments

will be available at EPA’s conformity

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

transp/, (once there, click on the

‘‘Conformity’’ button, then look for

‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions

for Conformity’’).

Ryan Bahr, Environmental Engineer,

Regulation Development Section (AR–

18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and

Radiation Division, United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4366,

bahr.ryan@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Throughout this document, whenever

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean

EPA. Today’s notice is simply an

announcement of a finding that we have

already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter

to the Indiana Department of

Environmental Management on May 9,

2001, stating that the motor vehicle

emissions budgets in the Northwest

Indiana submitted ozone attainment

demonstration and ROP plan for 2002,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 29, 2001 / Notices 29127

2005 and 2007 are adequate. This

finding will also be announced on

EPA’s conformity website: http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/, (once there,

click on the ‘‘Conformity’’ button, then

look for ‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP

Submissions for Conformity’’).

Transportation conformity is required

by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act.

EPA’s conformity rule requires that

transportation plans, programs, and

projects conform to state air quality

implementation plans and establishes

the criteria and procedures for

determining whether or not they do.

Transportation conformity to a SIP

means that transportation activities will

not produce new air quality violations,

worsen existing violations, or delay

timely attainment of the national

ambient air quality standards.

The criteria by which we determine

whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emission

budgets are adequate for conformity

purposes are outlined in 40 CFR

93.118(e)(4). Please note that an

adequacy review is separate from EPA’s

completeness review, and it also should

not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate

approval of the SIP. Even if we find a

budget adequate, the EPA may later be

disapprove the SIP.

We’ve described our process for

determining the adequacy of submitted

SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999

memo titled ‘‘Conformity Guidance on

Implementation of March 2, 1999

Conformity Court Decision’’). We

followed the guidance in making our

adequacy determination.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 14, 2001.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 01–13412 Filed 5–25–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ND–001–0008; AD–FRL–6973–1]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans; North Dakota;

Notice of Potential Violations of the

Prevention of Significant Deterioration

Increments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Information notice.

SUMMARY: North Dakota has conducted a

draft modeling analysis that shows

numerous violations of the Class I

prevention of significant deterioration

(PSD) increments for sulfur dioxide

(SO2) in four Class I areas. Those Class

I areas include Theodore Roosevelt

National Park, the Lostwood Wilderness

Area, the Medicine Lakes Wilderness

Area, and the Fort Peck Class I Indian

Reservation. In a March 13, 2001 letter

to EPA, the North Dakota Department of

Health has committed to refine this

modeling analysis and to subsequently

adopt revisions to the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) as may be

necessary to address the increment

violations that may be shown by the

revised analysis. The purpose of this

document is to inform the public of

potential increment violations and of

the commitments made by the North

Dakota Department of Health to address

the potential violations.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 29, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Relevant documents are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours at the Air and

Radiation Program, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999

18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, Colorado

80202–2405. Interested persons should

contact the person listed below to

arrange for a mutually agreeable time to

view these documents.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Amy Platt, Air and Radiation Program,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region VIII, (303) 312–6449.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Is the Purpose of This

Document?

The purpose of this document is to

inform the public of the commitments

made by the North Dakota Department

of Health regarding draft modeling

studies that have shown violations of

the PSD increment for SO2 in four Class

I areas. Those Class I areas include

Theodore Roosevelt National Park and

the Lostwood Wilderness Area, both of

which are in North Dakota, and the

Medicine Lakes Wilderness Area and

the Fort Peck Class I Indian Reservation,

both of which are within the State of

Montana. In a March 13, 2001 letter to

EPA, the North Dakota Department of

Health has committed to refine this

modeling analysis and to subsequently

adopt revisions to its SIP as may be

necessary to address the increment

violations that may be shown by the

revised modeling analysis. Specifically,

the North Dakota Department of Health

made the following commitments:

• By April 1, 2001—The State will

develop an air quality modeling

protocol.

• By January 2, 2002—The State will

complete its modeling analysis (or

within nine months from the time EPA

completes its review of the modeling

protocol).

• By February 1, 2002—The State will

provide EPA with a summary of its

modeling analysis.

• By August 1, 2003—The State will

complete a SIP revision to resolve the

increment issue (if the modeling

analysis shows that the increment is

exceeded).

Note that EPA is publishing the State’s

commitments in order to inform the

public of the process that the State and

EPA are following to address the

increment violations modeled by the

State. However, this document does not

make the State’s commitments legally

binding.

EPA responded to the State in a letter

dated March 28, 2001. Specifically, EPA

stated that, in light of the State’s March

13, 2001 commitment letter, we will not

initiate formal action to call for a SIP

revision to address these violations of

the PSD increments for SO2. We

acknowledged that the State needs to

refine the modeling analysis to better

determine the appropriate control

strategy(ies) to address the violations,

and we will work with the State in its

efforts. If the State does not meet its

commitments, or if the State and EPA

cannot agree on an acceptable modeling

protocol or on acceptable control

measures, we may decide to initiate a

formal SIP call.

II. What Are the PSD Increments?

The purpose of the PSD program of

the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7470–

7479, is to ensure that the air quality in

clean air areas remains clean and does

not deteriorate to the level of the

national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS). The mechanism created by

Congress to meet this goal is the

establishment of ‘‘PSD increments.’’

These increments define the maximum

allowable increases over baseline

concentrations that are allowed in a

clean air area for a particular pollutant.

Any increase above this level indicates

that significant deterioration of air

quality has occurred. Because only

emissions increases above the baseline

concentration are considered in

determining how much increment has

been consumed, the amount of

increment consumed can only be

determined through air quality

dispersion modeling, not through direct

monitoring of ambient concentrations.

The Act provides for three different

classes of air quality protection, to

reflect varying levels of protection from

significant deterioration in air quality.

In the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments,

Congress designated all international

parks, national wilderness areas and

national memorial parks which exceed

5000 acres in size, and all national parks