Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 67509-67510 [E8-27108]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 221 / Friday, November 14, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
the consistency achieved among the
EPA Regions and states, the resources
required to conduct the reviews, and the
overall effectiveness of the program.
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 in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Burden Statement: The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is
estimated to average 612 hours per
response. 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 which have subsequently
changed; 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: 50
states and 4 territories.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
54.
Frequency of Response: Once every
four years.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
11,016.
Estimated Total Annual Cost:
$357,684, includes $0 annualized
capital or O&M costs.
Changes in the Estimates: There is an
increase of 5,894 hours in the total
estimated burden currently identified in
the OMB Inventory of Approved ICR
Burdens. This increase is based on
EPA’s recent experience with
administering the program, an estimated
increase in the number of respondents
during the next cycle, and its work with
the states to try to improve the value
and utilization of the elements and
metrics by which state environmental
programs are measured.
Dated: November 6, 2008.
John Moses,
Acting Director, Collection Strategies
Division.
[FR Doc. E8–27111 Filed 11–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 Nov 13, 2008
Jkt 217001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[AMS–FRL–8740–9]
California State Nonroad Engine
Pollution Control Standards; California
Nonroad Compression Ignition
Engines—In-Use Fleets; Authorization
Request; Extension of Comment
Period
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice; Extension of Comment
Period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA previously announced
the opportunity for public hearing and
written comment on the California Air
Resources Board’s request for an
authorization of its regulations for fleets
that operate nonroad, diesel fueled
equipment with engines 25 horsepower
(hp) and greater and that require such
fleets to meet fleet average emissions
standards for oxides of nitrogen and
particulate matter, or, alternatively, to
comply with best available control
technology requirements for the
vehicles in those fleets. This previous
announcement occurred on October 7,
2008, at 72 FR 58385. By this notice
EPA is announcing an extension of the
written comment period from November
28, 2008 to December 19, 2008.
DATES: The written comment period is
extended to December 19, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2008–0691, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket,
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
0691, Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
Public Reading Room, EPA West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–
0691. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67509
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Dickinson, Compliance and
Innovative Strategies Division (6405J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Telephone:
(202) 343–9256, Fax: (202) 343–2804,
e-mail address:
Dickinson.David@EPA.GOV.
Dated: November 7, 2008.
Robert J. Meyers,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator,
Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. E8–27103 Filed 11–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–8587–6]
Environmental Impact Statements and
Regulations; Availability of EPA
Comments
Availability of EPA comments
prepared Pursuant to the Environmental
Review Process (ERP), under section
309 of the Clean Air Act and section
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act as amended. Requests for
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
67510
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 221 / Friday, November 14, 2008 / Notices
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
copies of EPA comments can be directed
to the Office of Federal Activities at
202–564–7146. An explanation of the
ratings assigned to draft environmental
impact statements (EISs) was published
in FR dated April 6, 2008 (73 FR 19833).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20080336, ERP No. D–AFS–
L65557–OR, Farley Vegetation
Management Project, To Conduct
Timber Harvest Commercial and NonCommercial Thinning, Fuels
Treatment Prescribed Burning and
Reforestation, Desolation Creek, North
Fork John Day Ranger District,
Umatilla National Forest, Grant
County, OR.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about wildfire
analysis, potential unauthorized public
vehicle use, and water quality impacts
from grazing. EPA recommends that the
final EIS include assurances that
appropriate subsequent treatments will
be conducted to maintain the decreases
in fire risk. Also, the final EIS should
consider increasing riparian plantings
and enclosures and modifying project
design elements for road closure/
decommissioning enforcement and
monitoring. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080344, ERP No. D–COE–
F39042–MN, Mississippi River
Headwaters Reservoir Operating Plan
Evaluation (ROPE), Proposed Revision
to the Operating Plan for the
Reservoirs, Upper Mississippi River
Headwaters, Bemidji to St. Paul, MN.
Summary: EPA expressed concerns
about impacts to water quality,
migratory bird populations and tribal
harvests of wild rice. EPA also
recommended that the Final EIS include
additional detailed and quantitative
information and analyses regarding the
potential environmental impacts, as
well as more information regarding the
project purpose and need. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080345, ERP No. D–USN–
E11067–NC, Navy Cherry Point Range
Complex, Proposed Action is to
Support and Conduct Current and
Emerging Training and Research,
Development, Testing and Evaluation
(RDT&E) Activities, South Atlantic
Bight, Cape Hatteras, NC.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
deposition of expended training
materials and their potential impacts
over time to reef complexes and hard
bottom habitat. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080348, ERP No. D–USN–
E11068–00, Undersea Warfare
Training Range Project, Installation
and Operation, Preferred Site
Jacksonville Operating Area, FL and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 Nov 13, 2008
Jkt 217001
Alternative Sites (within the
Charleston, SC; Cherry Point, NC; and
VACAPES Operating Areas, VA.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
deposition of expended training
materials and their potential impacts
over time to reef complexes and hard
bottom habitat. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080395, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65523–00, Sioux Ranger District
Travel Management Project, To
Designate the Road and Trail and
Areas Suitable for Public Motorized
Travel, Sioux Ranger District, Custer
National Forest, Carter County of MT
and Harding County of South Dakota.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about potential
effects to water quality, aquatic habitat,
wildlife and other resources from roads
and motorized uses. EPA supports the
preferred alternative (B) and
recommends further reductions in
motorized routes in areas with high
hazard (erosive) soils and in high risk
watersheds. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080396, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65524–MT, Ashland Ranger District
Travel Management Project,
Proposing to Designate Routes for
Public Motorized Use, Ashland
Ranger District, Custer National
Forest, Rosebud and Power River
Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about potential
adverse impacts to water quality,
aquatic habitat, wildlife and other
resources from roads and motorized
uses. EPA supports the preferred
alternative (B), but recommends further
reductions in motorized routes in areas
with high hazard (erosive) soils and in
high risk watersheds. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080356, ERP No. DS–AFS–
K65298–CA, Kings River Project, New
Information regarding Pacific Fisher
(Martes pennanti), Proposal to Restore
Historical Pre-1850 Forest Conditions,
Implementation, High Sierra Ranger
District, Sierra National Forest, Fresno
County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
Proposed Action that would result in a
more intensive level of logging than is
currently allowed. As a result, the
project increases the risk of short-term
and cumulative impacts to aquatic and
late successional forest species. Rating
EC2.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20080337, ERP No. F–BLM–
J65502–00, PROGRAMMATIC EIS—
Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Management (RMP) Amendments to
Address Land Use Allocations in
Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about impacts
to surface water and groundwater; air
quality; and the adequacy of the
cumulative impacts analysis.
EIS No. 20080379, ERP No. F–AFS–
G65100–NM, Santa Fe National Forest
Plan Amendment for Oil & Gas
Leasing and Roads Management,
Implementation, San Juan Basin, Cuba
Ranger District, NM.
Summary: No formal comments were
sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20080382, ERP No. F–AFS–
G65104–NM, Surface Management of
Gas Leasing and Development,
Proposes to Amend the Forest Plan
include Standard and Guidelines
Related to Gas Leasing and
Development in the Jicarilla Ranger
District, Carson National Forest, Rio
Arriba County, NM.
Summary: No formal comment letter
was sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20080390, ERP No. F–BLM–
J67034–MT, Montana Tunnels Mine
Project, Proposed M-Pit Mine
Expansion to Existing Mine Pit to
Access and Mine Additional Ore
Resources, Jefferson County, MT.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about potential
geochemical, hydrological and longterm water quality uncertainties and
adequacy of financial assurances to
address potential closure/post-closure
environmental contamination.
EIS No. 20080402, ERP No. F–AFS–
J65459–MT, Whitetail-Pipestone
Travel Management, Develop SiteSpecific Travel Management Plan,
Jefferson and Butte Ranger Districts,
Beaverhead-Deerlodge National
Forest, Jefferson and Silver Bow
Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA continues to express
environmental concerns about potential
effects to water quality, aquatic habitat,
and other resources from roads and
motorized uses.
Dated: November 10, 2008.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E8–27108 Filed 11–13–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\14NON1.SGM
14NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 221 (Friday, November 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67509-67510]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27108]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-8587-6]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared Pursuant to the Environmental
Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and
section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended.
Requests for
[[Page 67510]]
copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal
Activities at 202-564-7146. An explanation of the ratings assigned to
draft environmental impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated
April 6, 2008 (73 FR 19833).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20080336, ERP No. D-AFS-L65557-OR, Farley Vegetation Management
Project, To Conduct Timber Harvest Commercial and Non-Commercial
Thinning, Fuels Treatment Prescribed Burning and Reforestation,
Desolation Creek, North Fork John Day Ranger District, Umatilla
National Forest, Grant County, OR.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about wildfire
analysis, potential unauthorized public vehicle use, and water quality
impacts from grazing. EPA recommends that the final EIS include
assurances that appropriate subsequent treatments will be conducted to
maintain the decreases in fire risk. Also, the final EIS should
consider increasing riparian plantings and enclosures and modifying
project design elements for road closure/decommissioning enforcement
and monitoring. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080344, ERP No. D-COE-F39042-MN, Mississippi River Headwaters
Reservoir Operating Plan Evaluation (ROPE), Proposed Revision to the
Operating Plan for the Reservoirs, Upper Mississippi River Headwaters,
Bemidji to St. Paul, MN.
Summary: EPA expressed concerns about impacts to water quality,
migratory bird populations and tribal harvests of wild rice. EPA also
recommended that the Final EIS include additional detailed and
quantitative information and analyses regarding the potential
environmental impacts, as well as more information regarding the
project purpose and need. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080345, ERP No. D-USN-E11067-NC, Navy Cherry Point Range
Complex, Proposed Action is to Support and Conduct Current and Emerging
Training and Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E)
Activities, South Atlantic Bight, Cape Hatteras, NC.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the deposition
of expended training materials and their potential impacts over time to
reef complexes and hard bottom habitat. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080348, ERP No. D-USN-E11068-00, Undersea Warfare Training
Range Project, Installation and Operation, Preferred Site Jacksonville
Operating Area, FL and Alternative Sites (within the Charleston, SC;
Cherry Point, NC; and VACAPES Operating Areas, VA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the deposition
of expended training materials and their potential impacts over time to
reef complexes and hard bottom habitat. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080395, ERP No. D-AFS-J65523-00, Sioux Ranger District Travel
Management Project, To Designate the Road and Trail and Areas Suitable
for Public Motorized Travel, Sioux Ranger District, Custer National
Forest, Carter County of MT and Harding County of South Dakota.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential
effects to water quality, aquatic habitat, wildlife and other resources
from roads and motorized uses. EPA supports the preferred alternative
(B) and recommends further reductions in motorized routes in areas with
high hazard (erosive) soils and in high risk watersheds. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080396, ERP No. D-AFS-J65524-MT, Ashland Ranger District
Travel Management Project, Proposing to Designate Routes for Public
Motorized Use, Ashland Ranger District, Custer National Forest, Rosebud
and Power River Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential
adverse impacts to water quality, aquatic habitat, wildlife and other
resources from roads and motorized uses. EPA supports the preferred
alternative (B), but recommends further reductions in motorized routes
in areas with high hazard (erosive) soils and in high risk watersheds.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080356, ERP No. DS-AFS-K65298-CA, Kings River Project, New
Information regarding Pacific Fisher (Martes pennanti), Proposal to
Restore Historical Pre-1850 Forest Conditions, Implementation, High
Sierra Ranger District, Sierra National Forest, Fresno County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the Proposed
Action that would result in a more intensive level of logging than is
currently allowed. As a result, the project increases the risk of
short-term and cumulative impacts to aquatic and late successional
forest species. Rating EC2.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20080337, ERP No. F-BLM-J65502-00, PROGRAMMATIC EIS--Oil Shale
and Tar Sands Resource Management (RMP) Amendments to Address Land Use
Allocations in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.
Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about impacts
to surface water and groundwater; air quality; and the adequacy of the
cumulative impacts analysis.
EIS No. 20080379, ERP No. F-AFS-G65100-NM, Santa Fe National Forest
Plan Amendment for Oil & Gas Leasing and Roads Management,
Implementation, San Juan Basin, Cuba Ranger District, NM.
Summary: No formal comments were sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20080382, ERP No. F-AFS-G65104-NM, Surface Management of Gas
Leasing and Development, Proposes to Amend the Forest Plan include
Standard and Guidelines Related to Gas Leasing and Development in the
Jicarilla Ranger District, Carson National Forest, Rio Arriba County,
NM.
Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
EIS No. 20080390, ERP No. F-BLM-J67034-MT, Montana Tunnels Mine
Project, Proposed M-Pit Mine Expansion to Existing Mine Pit to Access
and Mine Additional Ore Resources, Jefferson County, MT.
Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about
potential geochemical, hydrological and long-term water quality
uncertainties and adequacy of financial assurances to address potential
closure/post-closure environmental contamination.
EIS No. 20080402, ERP No. F-AFS-J65459-MT, Whitetail-Pipestone Travel
Management, Develop Site-Specific Travel Management Plan, Jefferson and
Butte Ranger Districts, Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, Jefferson
and Silver Bow Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA continues to express environmental concerns about
potential effects to water quality, aquatic habitat, and other
resources from roads and motorized uses.
Dated: November 10, 2008.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E8-27108 Filed 11-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P