Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 21682-21683 [E9-10772]

Download as PDF 21682 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 88 / Friday, May 8, 2009 / Notices hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES information themselves, hire consultants to collect the information or require applicants/sponsors of the federal action to provide the information. Burden Statement: The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 37 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. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency’s estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: Estimated total number of potential respondents: 859. Frequency of response: Annual. Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 1. Estimated total annual burden hours: 31,841 hours. Estimated total annual costs: $1,965,000. This includes an estimated burden cost of $1,965,000 and an estimated cost of $0 for capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? There are only minor revisions to the cost estimates since the last renewal of this ICR (July 11, 2006; 71 FR 39104). The last collection request anticipated the program progressing from the planning stages to implementation. That transition has been somewhat delayed as most states were late in getting their implementation plans submitted by the December 2007 deadline. Also, the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to vacate (on July 11, 2008) and subsequently remand (on December 23, 2008) the Clean Air Interstate Rule has added much uncertainty to the implementation phase of the program. Consequently, the amount of effort anticipated in July 2006 remains the same today, and burden estimates are essentially unchanged, VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:51 May 07, 2009 Jkt 217001 except for revised labor and wage rates using 2007 cost estimates. Also, in 2006, it was estimated that one tribe would submit a SIP; however no tribes elected to submit SIPs and the number of respondents has been reduced by one. What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Dated: April 29, 2009. Jenny N. Edmonds, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. [FR Doc. E9–10763 Filed 5–7–09; 8:45 am] Final EISs BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–8593–3] 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 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 17, 2009 (74 FR 17860). Draft EISs EIS No. 20090045, ERP No. D–USN– K11023–00, West Coast Basing of the MV–22 Determining Basing Location(s) and Providing Efficient Training Operations, CA, AZ. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to air quality from the basing of the MV– 22. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20090057, ERP No. D–AFS– L65567–00, Wallowa-Whitman National Forest Invasive Plants Treatment Project, To Protect Native PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Vegetation by Controlling, Containing, or Eradicating Invasive Plant, Wallowa, Baker, Malheur, and Grant Counties, OR and Adams and Nez Perce Counties, ID. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential adverse impacts from herbicide treatments to water quality, especially for impaired water bodies. The final EIS should include mitigation measures ensuring weed treatments would not degrade water quality. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20090070, ERP No. DS–AFS– K65312–CA, Pilgrim Vegetation Management Project, Updated Information to Address and Respond to the Specific Issues Identified in the Court Ruling. Implementation, ShastaTrinity National Forest, Siskiyou County, CA. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential inadvertent exposure of Sporax to humans and non-target species, as well as potential adverse impacts to snag-dependent and late successional species. Rating EC2. Sfmt 4703 EIS No. 20090068, ERP No. F–AFS– L05240–AK, Angoon Hydroelectric Project, Construction and Operation, Special Use Authorization, Thayer Creek, Admiralty Island National Monument, Tongass National Forest, AK. Summary: The Final EIS adequately responded to our comments on environmental impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat; therefore, EPA does not object to this action. EIS No. 20090072, ERP No. F–USN– E11066–00, Jacksonville Range Complex Project, To Support and Conduct Current and Emerging Training and RDT&E Operations, NC, SC, GA and FL. Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the deposition of expended training materials and their accumulation over time. EIS No. 20090119, ERP No. F–NPS– C65006–NY, Governors Island National Monument, General Management Plan, Implementation, New York Harbor, NY. Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. EIS No. 20090084, ERP No. FA–BLM– K67011–NV, Betze Pit Expansion Project, Development of New Facilities and Expansion of Existing Open-Pit Gold Mining, Eureka and Elko Counties, NV. E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 88 / Friday, May 8, 2009 / Notices Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about potential ecological impacts from the cessation of mine dewatering and tailings closure. EPA recommends the ROD include a specific plan to successfully transition wetlands and irrigated croplands to upland salt-tolerant species at the end of infiltration activities, and describe tailings closure, associated ecological risks, and mitigation measures. Dated: May 5, 2009. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E9–10772 Filed 5–7–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL–8902–5] Notice of Proposed Administrative Settlement Pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act; Anaconda Copper Site hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice, request for public comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with Section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), as amended, 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed Administrative Order on Consent and Settlement Agreement for Removal Action and Past Response Costs (‘‘Agreement,’’ Region 9 Docket No. 9–2009–10) pursuant to Section 122(h) of CERCLA concerning the Anaconda Copper Mine Site (the ‘‘Site’’), located in Yerington, Nevada. The settling party is Atlantic Richfield Company (‘‘ARC’’). Through the proposed Agreement, ARC will pay to the United States $2.2 million for response costs at the Site, and will conduct approximately $8 million in interim removal actions to mitigate threats from hazardous substances. The response actions that ARC will perform include: Installing caps over former evaporation ponds to help prevent accumulation of acidic ponds and to prevent the migration of hazardous dusts; mitigating threats from soils that contain concentrated amounts of otherwise naturally occurring radiation; removing abandoned asbestos containing pipes; decommissioning abandoned electrical lines; and continuing operation and maintenance VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:51 May 07, 2009 Jkt 217001 of the fluid management system for abandoned heap leach facilities. The Agreement provides ARC with a covenant not to sue and contribution protection for the work performed at the Site, and for the response costs paid. For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this Notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the proposed Agreement. The administrative record and the Agency’s response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at EPA’s Region IX Superfund Records Center, located at 95 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before June 8, 2009. ADDRESSES: The proposed Agreement may be obtained from the EPA Region IX Superfund Records Center, at 95 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105 ((415) 536–2000). Comments regarding the proposed Agreement should be addressed to Andrew Helmlinger at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ORC–3), 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105, and should reference the Anaconda Copper Agreement, and Region IX Docket No. 9–2009–10. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Helmlinger, Office of Regional Counsel, (415) 972–3904, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Dated: April 22, 2009. Keith A. Takata, Director, Superfund Division. [FR Doc. E9–10764 Filed 5–7–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA–HQ–OPPT–2008–0790; FRL–8790–6] Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools; State Request for Waiver From Requirements; New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services Final Approval To Implement State Program AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final approval. SUMMARY: EPA is approving a waiver of the requirements of the Federal asbestos-in-schools program for the State of New Hampshire. A waiver request can be granted if EPA determines that the State of New Hampshire is implementing or intends to implement a state program of asbestos PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 21683 inspection and management that is at least as stringent as the federal program. This action approves the waiver request submitted by Governor John H. Lynch to the EPA Region 1 Regional Administrator, on July 15, 2008, via a letter with supporting documentation requesting a full waiver of the requirements of EPA’s asbestos-inschools program pursuant to the AHERA statute and 40 CFR 763.98. EPA published a notice of proposed approval and request for comments on December 19, 2008, with a detailed description of this waiver request. EPA’s rationale for approving the waiver was provided in that notice of proposed approval and request for comments and will not be restated here. No comments were received on EPA’s proposal. DATES: Effective Date: This final approval is effective on May 8, 2009. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA–HQ–OPPT– 2008–0790. All documents in the docket are listed on the https:// www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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 https:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy through the Asbestos Coordinator, Region 1—New England, Environmental Protection Agency, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 Mailcode SEP), Boston, MA 02114–2023. For anyone wishing to physically inspect the material, EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 5, excluding federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–8182; e-mail address: TSCA–Hotline@epa.gov. For technical information contact: James M. Bryson, Asbestos Coordinator, Region 1—New England, Environmental Protection Agency, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 Mailcode SEP, Boston, MA E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 88 (Friday, May 8, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21682-21683]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-10772]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-8593-3]


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 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 17, 2009 (74 
FR 17860).

Draft EISs

EIS No. 20090045, ERP No. D-USN-K11023-00, West Coast Basing of the MV-
22 Determining Basing Location(s) and Providing Efficient Training 
Operations, CA, AZ.

    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to air 
quality from the basing of the MV-22. Rating EC2.

EIS No. 20090057, ERP No. D-AFS-L65567-00, Wallowa-Whitman National 
Forest Invasive Plants Treatment Project, To Protect Native Vegetation 
by Controlling, Containing, or Eradicating Invasive Plant, Wallowa, 
Baker, Malheur, and Grant Counties, OR and Adams and Nez Perce 
Counties, ID.

    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential 
adverse impacts from herbicide treatments to water quality, especially 
for impaired water bodies. The final EIS should include mitigation 
measures ensuring weed treatments would not degrade water quality. 
Rating EC2.

EIS No. 20090070, ERP No. DS-AFS-K65312-CA, Pilgrim Vegetation 
Management Project, Updated Information to Address and Respond to the 
Specific Issues Identified in the Court Ruling. Implementation, Shasta-
Trinity National Forest, Siskiyou County, CA.

    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential 
inadvertent exposure of Sporax to humans and non-target species, as 
well as potential adverse impacts to snag-dependent and late 
successional species. Rating EC2.

Final EISs

EIS No. 20090068, ERP No. F-AFS-L05240-AK, Angoon Hydroelectric 
Project, Construction and Operation, Special Use Authorization, Thayer 
Creek, Admiralty Island National Monument, Tongass National Forest, AK.

    Summary: The Final EIS adequately responded to our comments on 
environmental impacts to water quality and aquatic habitat; therefore, 
EPA does not object to this action.

EIS No. 20090072, ERP No. F-USN-E11066-00, Jacksonville Range Complex 
Project, To Support and Conduct Current and Emerging Training and RDT&E 
Operations, NC, SC, GA and FL.

    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the 
deposition of expended training materials and their accumulation over 
time.

EIS No. 20090119, ERP No. F-NPS-C65006-NY, Governors Island National 
Monument, General Management Plan, Implementation, New York Harbor, NY.

    Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

EIS No. 20090084, ERP No. FA-BLM-K67011-NV, Betze Pit Expansion 
Project, Development of New Facilities and Expansion of Existing Open-
Pit Gold Mining, Eureka and Elko Counties, NV.


[[Page 21683]]


    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about 
potential ecological impacts from the cessation of mine dewatering and 
tailings closure. EPA recommends the ROD include a specific plan to 
successfully transition wetlands and irrigated croplands to upland 
salt-tolerant species at the end of infiltration activities, and 
describe tailings closure, associated ecological risks, and mitigation 
measures.

    Dated: May 5, 2009.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E9-10772 Filed 5-7-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.