30950 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. E9–15367 Filed 6–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–C 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0219; FRL–8921–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Michigan; Redesignation of 

the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is making a 

determination under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) that the Detroit-Ann Arbor 

nonattainment area has attained the 

8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). The DetroitAnn Arbor area includes Lenawee, 

Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, 

St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne 

Counties. This determination is based 

on quality-assured ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 2006–2008 

ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS has been attained 

in the area. EPA is approving a request 

from the State of Michigan to 

redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area 

to attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The Michigan Department of 

Environmental Quality (MDEQ) 

submitted this request on March 6, 

2009. In approving this request, EPA is 

also approving, as a revision to the 

Michigan State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), the State’s plan for maintaining 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area 

through 2020. EPA is approving the 

2005 base year emissions inventory for 

the Detroit-Ann Arbor area as meeting 

the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of 

the CAA. EPA also finds adequate and 

is approving the State’s 2020 Motor 

Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 

the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. EPA 

proposed these actions on April 23, 

2009. EPA provided a 30-day review 

and comment period, which closed on 

May 26, 2009. EPA received comments 

in support of the redesignation from 

Consumers Energy and the Southeast 

Michigan Council of Governments. EPA 

received no comments in opposition to 

the proposal. 

DATES: This final rule is effective June 

29, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action: Docket ID No. 

EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0219. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically at http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Kathleen D’Agostino, 

Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 

1767 before visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–1767, 

dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. What Is the Background for This Rule? 

II. What Comments Did We Receive on the 

Proposed Rule? 

III. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Is the Background for This 

Rule? 

A. What Is the General Background 

Information? 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA 

promulgated an 8-hour ozone standard 

of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). EPA 

published a final rule designating and 

classifying areas under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857). 

On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated 

a more stringent 8-hour ozone standard 

of 0.075 ppm which was published in 

the Federal Register on March 27, 2008 

(73 FR 16436). EPA will designate 

nonattainment areas under the 2008 

8-hour ozone standard in 2010. Today’s 

approval of Michigan’s SIP revision 

addresses only the status of the DetroitAnn Arbor area with respect to the 1997 

8-hour ozone standard. 

The background for today’s actions 

with respect to the 1997 ozone standard 

is discussed in detail in EPA’s April 23, 

2009, proposal (74 FR 18479). In that 

rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour 

ozone standard is attained when the 

three-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ozone concentrations is less than or 

equal to 0.08 ppm. (See 69 FR 23857 

(April 30, 2004) for further information.) 

The data completeness requirement is 

met when the average percent of days 

with valid ambient monitoring data is 

greater than 90%, and no single year has 

less than 75% data completeness, as 

determined in accordance with 

appendix I of part 50. 

Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate 

nonattainment areas to attainment if 

sufficient complete, quality-assured data 

are available to determine that the area 

has attained the standard and that it 

meets the other CAA redesignation 

requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). 

On March 6, 2009, MDEQ submitted 

a request to redesignate the Detroit-Ann 

Arbor area to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone standard. The request included 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

data for the period of 2006 through 

2008, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for 

ozone had been achieved. The April 23, 

2009, proposed rule provides a detailed 

discussion of how Michigan met this 

and other CAA requirements. 

B. What Are the Impacts of the 

December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, 

United States Court of Appeals 

Decisions Regarding EPA’s Phase 1 

Implementation Rule? 

On December 22, 2006, in South 

Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. 

EPA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit vacated 

EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule for 

the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23951, 

April 30, 2004). 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 

2006). On June 8, 2007, in response to 

several petitions for rehearing, the D.C. 

Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 

Rule was vacated only with regard to 

those parts of the rule that had been 

successfully challenged. Id., Docket No. 

04–1201. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule 

provisions related to classifications for 

areas currently classified under subpart 

2 of Title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour 

nonattainment areas, the 8-hour 

attainment dates, and the timing for 

emissions reductions needed for 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

remain effective. The June 8th decision 

left intact the Court’s rejection of EPA’s 

reasons for implementing the 8-hour 

standard in certain nonattainment areas 

under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 30951 

limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand 

EPA’s revocation of the 

1-hour standard and those antibacksliding provisions of the Phase 1 

Rule that had not been successfully 

challenged. The June 8th decision 

reaffirmed the Court’s December 22, 

2006, decision that EPA had improperly 

failed to retain four measures required 

for 1-hour nonattainment areas under 

the anti-backsliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review (NSR) requirements 

based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 

nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be 

implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, 

contingent on an area not making 

reasonable further progress toward 

attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for 

failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) 

certain transportation conformity 

requirements for certain types of Federal 

actions. The June 8th decision clarified 

that the Court’s reference to conformity 

requirements was limited to requiring 

the continued use of 1-hour motor 

vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour 

budgets were available for 8-hour 

conformity determinations. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

proposal, EPA does not believe that the 

Court’s rulings alter any requirements 

relevant to this redesignation action so 

as to preclude redesignation. EPA 

believes that the Court’s December 22, 

2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions 

impose no impediment to moving 

forward with redesignation of this area 

to attainment, because, even in light of 

the Court’s decisions, redesignation is 

appropriate under the relevant 

redesignation provisions of the CAA 

and longstanding policies regarding 

redesignation requests. 

With respect to the requirement for 

transportation conformity under the 1- 

hour standard, the Court in its June 8th 

decision clarified that, for those areas 

with 1-hour motor vehicle emissions 

budgets in their maintenance plans, 

anti-backsliding requires only that those 

1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour 

conformity determinations until 

replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet 

this requirement, conformity 

determinations in such areas must 

comply with the applicable 

requirements of EPA’s conformity 

regulations at 40 CFR part 93. 

II. What Comments Did We Receive on 

the Proposed Rule? 

EPA provided a 30-day review and 

comment period. The comment period 

closed on May 26, 2009. EPA received 

comments in support of the 

redesignation from Consumers Energy 

and the Southeast Michigan Council of 

Governments. EPA did not receive any 

adverse comments. 

III. What Action Is EPA Taking? 

EPA is making a determination that 

the Detroit-Ann Arbor area has attained 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also 

approving the maintenance plan SIP 

revision for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. 

EPA’s approval of the maintenance plan 

is based on Michigan’s demonstration 

that the plan meets the requirements of 

section 175A of the CAA. After 

evaluating Michigan’s redesignation 

request, EPA has determined that it 

meets the redesignation criteria set forth 

in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 

Therefore, EPA is approving the 

redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor 

area from nonattainment to attainment 

for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is 

approving the 2005 base year emissions 

inventory for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area 

as meeting the requirements of section 

182(a)(1) of the CAA. Finally, EPA also 

finds adequate and is approving the 

State’s 2020 MVEBs for the Detroit-Ann 

Arbor area. 

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), 

EPA finds there is good cause for this 

action to become effective immediately 

upon publication. This is because a 

delayed effective date is unnecessary 

due to the nature of a redesignation to 

attainment, which relieves the area from 

certain CAA requirements that would 

otherwise apply to it. The immediate 

effective date for this action is 

authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(1), which provides that 

rulemaking actions may become 

effective less than 30 days after 

publication if the rule ‘‘grants or 

recognizes an exemption or relieves a 

restriction,’’ and section 553(d)(3) 

which allows an effective date less than 

30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule.’’ 

The purpose of the 30-day waiting 

period prescribed in section 553(d) is to 

give affected parties a reasonable time to 

adjust their behavior and prepare before 

the final rule takes effect. Today’s rule, 

however, does not create any new 

regulatory requirements such that 

affected parties would need time to 

prepare before the rule takes effect. 

Rather, today’s rule relieves the State of 

planning requirements for this 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area. For these 

reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 

U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this action to 

become effective on the date of 

publication of this action. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866; Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, September 30, 1993), this action 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

and therefore is not subject to review by 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This action merely approves State law 

as meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by State law. 

Redesignation of an area to attainment 

under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 

does not impose any new requirements 

on small entities. Redesignation is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area and does not impose 

any new regulatory requirements on 

sources. Accordingly, the Administrator 

certifies that this rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under State law, 

and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by State law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). Redesignation is an 

action that merely affects the status of 

a geographical area, does not impose 

any new requirements on sources, or 

allows a State to avoid adopting or 

implementing other requirements, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the CAA. 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
30952 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This rule also does not have Tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian Tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal government and Indian Tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy 

action,’’ this action is also not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, 

requires Federal agencies to use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus to 

carry out policy objectives, so long as 

such standards are not inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise 

impracticable. In reviewing program 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

State choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the CAA. Absent a prior 

existing requirement for the State to use 

voluntary consensus standards, EPA has 

no authority to disapprove a program 

submission for failure to use such 

standards, and it would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in place of a program 

submission that otherwise satisfies the 

provisions of the Act. Redesignation is 

an action that affects the status of a 

geographical area but does not impose 

any new requirements on sources. Thus, 

the requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801, et seq., enacted pursuant to 

the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 

generally provides that, before a rule 

may take effect, the agency 

promulgating the rule must submit a 

rule report which includes a copy of the 

rule to each House of the Congress and 

to the Comptroller General of the United 

States. EPA will submit a report 

containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by August 28, 2009. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

the action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See 42 U.S.C. 

7607(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, National parks, Wilderness 

areas. 

Dated: June 11, 2009. 

Walter W. Kovalick Jr, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations are 

amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart X—Michigan 

■ 2. Section 52.1170(e) is amended by 

adding an entry to the end of the table 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.1170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date 

EPA approval date Comments 

* * * * * * * 

8-hour ozone maintenance plan ........................... Detroit-Ann Arbor (Lenawee, Livingston, 

Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, 

Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties).

3/6/2009 6/29/2009 

■ 3. Section 52.1174 is amended by 

adding paragraph (z) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(z) Approval—On March 6, 2009, 

Michigan submitted a request to 

redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area 

(Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, 

Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, 

and Wayne Counties) to attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). As part of its redesignation 

requests, the State submitted a 

maintenance plan as required by section 

175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of 

the section 175 maintenance plan 

include a contingency plan and an 

obligation to submit subsequent 

maintenance plan revisions in 8 years as 

required by the Clean Air Act. If 

monitors in any of these areas record a 

violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

Michigan will adopt and implement one 

or more contingency measures. The list 

of possible contingency measures 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations 30953 

includes: Reduced VOC content in 

architectural, industrial, and 

maintenance (AIM) coatings rule; auto 

body refinisher self-certification audit 

program; reduced VOC degreasing/ 

solvent cleaning rule; diesel retrofit 

program; reduced idling program; 

portable fuel container replacement 

rule; and, food preparation flame broiler 

control rule. Also included in the 

Michigan’s submittal were a 2005 base 

year emissions inventory and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for 

use to determine transportation 

conformity in the area. For the DetroitAnn Arbor area, Michigan has 

established separate MVEBS for the 

Southeast Michigan Council of 

Governments (SEMCOG) region 

(Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, 

St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne 

Counties) and for Lenawee County. 

MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs 

for the SEMCOG region to be 106 tons 

per day for VOC and 274 tpd for NOX. 

MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs 

for Lenawee County to be 2.1 tpd for 

VOC and 4.4 tpd for NOX. 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 81.323 is amended by 

revising the entry for Detroit-Ann Arbor, 

MI in the table entitled ‘‘MichiganOzone (8-Hour Standard)’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 81.323 Michigan. 

* * * * * 

MICHIGAN-OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD) 

Designated area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type 

* * * * * * * 

Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI: 

Lenawee County ................................................................. 6/29/2009 Attainment.

Livingston County. 

Macomb County.

Monroe County.

Oakland County.

St. Clair County.

Washtenaw County.

Wayne County.

* * * * * * * 

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 

[FR Doc. E9–14750 Filed 6–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 141 and 143 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2008–0644; FRL–8920–8] 

RIN 2040–AF00 

National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations: Minor Correction to Stage 

2 Disinfectants and Disinfection 

Byproducts Rule and Changes in 

References to Analytical Methods 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is making 

a minor correction to the Stage 2 

Disinfectants and Disinfection 

Byproducts Rule (DBPR) and minor, 

unrelated, editorial changes in 

references to analytical methods in the 

regulations. EPA promulgated the Stage 

2 Disinfectants and Disinfection 

Byproducts Rule on January 4, 2006. A 

requirement for ground water systems 

serving 500–9,999 people was 

unintentionally excluded from the final 

rule. As a result, the rule allowed for 

less routine compliance monitoring than 

intended for this category of public 

water systems (PWSs). These PWSs 

should have been required to monitor 

for both total trihalomethanes (TTHM) 

and haloacetic acids (HAA5) 

concentrations at two locations. Due to 

the error, they were only required to 

monitor for either TTHM or HAA5 at 

two locations. EPA is also making 

minor, unrelated changes in the 

regulations by adding references to the 

list of analytical methods approved 

under the Expedited Approval Process, 

removing references to outdated 

methods, and specifying a new source 

for the publication titled Technical 

Notes on Drinking Water Methods. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 

29, 2009. For judicial review purposes, 

this final rule is promulgated as of June 

29, 2009. The incorporation by reference 

of certain publications listed in this rule 

is effective as of June 29, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. OW–2008–0644. All documents in 

the docket are listed on the 

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the OW Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC. The Public 

Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is 

(202) 566–1744, and the telephone 

number for the OW docket is (202) 566– 

2426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information concerning the Stage 2 

DBPR minor correction contact Tom 

Grubbs, Standards and Risk 

Management Division, Office of Ground 

Water and Drinking Water, M/C 4607M, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20460; telephone 

number (202) 564–5262; e-mail address 

grubbs.thomas@epa.gov. For 

information concerning the methods 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES