Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 6025-6026 [2010-2572]
Download as PDF
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
Business Information (CBI), or other
information whose public disclosure is
restricted by statute. For further
information about the electronic docket,
go to https://www.regulations.gov.
Title: NESHAP for Printing and
Publishing Industry (Renewal).
ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number
1739.06, OMB Control Number 2060–
0335.
ICR Status: This ICR is schedule to
expire on March 31, 2010. Under OMB
regulations, the Agency may continue to
conduct or sponsor the collection of
information while this submission is
pending at OMB. 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 title 40 of the CFR, after
appearing in the Federal Register when
approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9,
and displayed either by publication in
the Federal Register or by other
appropriate means, such as on the
related collection instrument or form, if
applicable. The display of OMB control
numbers in certain EPA regulations is
consolidated in 40 CFR part 9.
Abstract: The National Emission
Standards of Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) for Printing and Publishing
Industry were proposed on March 14,
1995 (60 FR 13664), promulgated on
May 30, 1996 (61 FR 27131), and
amended on May 24, 2006 (71 FR
29792). These standards apply to the
following facilities in 40 CFR subpart
KK: Publication rotogravure, product
and packaging rotogravure, and wideweb flexographic printing presses at
major sources. The effective date was
May 30, 1999, for sources existing on
May 30, 1996. For new sources or
reconstructed sources after May 30,
1996, the effective date of startup is May
30, 1996, whichever is later.
Owners and operators of a new and
existing area source are subject to the
General Provision (40 CFR part 63,
subpart A). In general, all NESHAP
standards require initial notifications,
performance tests plans, and periodic
reports by the owners/operators of the
affected facilities. For the facilities
installing continuous monitoring
systems (CMS), there are performance
test and maintenance reports.
They are also required to maintain
records of the occurrence and duration
of any startup, shutdown, or
malfunction in the operation of an
affected facility, or any period during
which the monitoring system is
inoperative. These notifications, reports,
and records are essential in determining
compliance and are required of all
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
affected facilities subject to NESHAP.
Semiannual summary reports are also
required.
Any owner or operator subject to the
provisions of this subpart must maintain
a file of these measurements, and retain
the file for at least five years following
the collection of such measurements,
maintenance reports, and records.
All reports are sent to the delegated
state or local authority. In the event that
there is no such delegated authority, the
reports are sent directly to the EPA
regional office. This information is
being collected to assure compliance
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart KK, as
authorized in sections 112 and 114(a) of
the Clean Air Act. The required
information consists of emissions data
and other information that have been
determined to be private.
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
Number for EPA regulations listed in 40
CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, are
identified on the form and/or
instrument, if applicable.
Burden Statement: The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information estimated
to average 95 hour per response. Burden
means the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to
generate, maintain, retain, or disclose,
and 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. All existing
ways will have to adjust to comply with
any previously applicable instructions
and requirements that 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:
Printing and publishing industry.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
352.
Frequency of Response: Initially,
annually, and semiannually.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
58,215.
Estimated Total Annual Cost:
$5,888,997, which includes $5,474,997
in labor costs, $0 in capital/startup
costs, and $414,000 in operation and
maintenance (O&M) costs.
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6025
Changes in the Estimates: There is a
change in this ICR as compared to the
previous one. Based on our discussions
with the printing and publishing
industry representatives, the printing
industry in particular, will be
experiencing essentially a flat
production in the coming years with no
new facilities anticipated. This ICR also
reflects the most recent hourly labor
rates which, takes into account the
managerial, technical and clerical
burdens as compared to the previous
ICR. Corrections include a minor
mathematical error and recalculation of
the number of responses.
There is a small increase in the
capital/startup and operations and
maintenance (O&M) costs from the
previous ICR, which is due to roundingup the number of affective respondents.
Dated: February 1, 2010.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2010–2536 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–8988–1]
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 or https://www.epa.gov/
compliance/nepa/.
An explanation of the ratings assigned
to draft environmental impact
statements (EISs) was published in
Federal Register dated July 17, 2009 (74
FR 34754).
Notice
In accordance with Section 309(a) of
the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to
make its comments on EISs issued by
other Federal agencies public.
Historically, EPA has met this mandate
by publishing weekly notices of
availability of EPA comments, which
includes a brief summary of EPA’s
comment letters, in the Federal
Register. Since February 2008, EPA has
been including its comment letters on
EISs on its Web site at: https://
www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/
eisdata.html. Including the entire EIS
comment letters on the Web site
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
6026
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices
satisfies the Section 309(a) requirement
to make EPA’s comments on EISs
available to the public. Accordingly,
after March 31, 2010, EPA will
discontinue the publication of this
notice of availability of EPA comments
in the Federal Register.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20090210, ERP No. D–FRC–
A03087–00, Ruby Pipeline Project,
Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline
Facilities, Right-of-Way Grants (and/
or Temporary Use or Special Use
Permits), WY, UT, NV, and OR.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about impacts
to perennial waters, wetlands, and
impacts related to hydrostatic pipeline
testing. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090267, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65546–MT, Bitterroot National Forest
Travel Management Planning, To
Address Conflicts between Motorized
and Non-Motorized Users, Ravalli
County, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about impacts
to watersheds and other resources.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090424, ERP No. D–USN–
L11043–AK, Gulf of Alaska Navy
Training Activities, Proposal to
Support and Conduct Current,
Emerging, and Future Training
Activities, Implementation, Gulf of
Alaska, AK.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about impacts
to the marine environment from the
deposition of expended training
materials. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090211, ERP No. DS–AFS–
J61114–CO, Vail Ski Area’s 2007
Improvement Project, Proposed OnMountain Restaurant from the top of
Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, SpecialUse-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger
District, White River National Forest,
Eagle County, CO.
Summary: No formal comment letter
was sent to the preparing agency. Rating
NC.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20090224, ERP No. F–AFS–
J65531–SD, Telegraph Project Area,
Proposes to Implement Multiple
Resource Management Actions,
Northern Hills Ranger District, Black
Hills National Forest, Lawrence and
Pennington Counties, SD.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about the need
to develop a project level adaptive
management plan.
EIS No. 20090406, ERP No. F–AFS–
K65350–CA, Modoc National Forest
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:26 Feb 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
Motorized Travel Management Plan,
Implementation, National Forest
Transportation System (NFTS),
Modoc, Lassen and Siskiyou
Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about vernal
pool and wet meadow impacts.
EIS No. 20090427, ERP No. F–NPS–
F60009–MN, Disposition of Bureau of
Mines Property, Twin Cities Research
Center Main Campus,
Implementation, Hennepin County,
MN.
Summary: EPA commends the
National Park Service for selecting the
environmentally preferred alternative,
and recommends that the Record of
Decision clarify the future status of key
cultural resources on site.
EIS No. 20090440, ERP No. F–AFS–
J61114–CO, Vail Ski Area’s 2007
Improvement Project, Proposed OnMountain Restaurant from the top of
Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, SpecialUse-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger
District, White River National Forest,
Eagle County, CO.
Summary: EPA does not object to the
proposed action.
EIS No. 20090446, ERP No. F–AFS–
K65373–NV, Jarbidge Ranger District
Rangeland Management Project,
Proposed Reauthorizing Grazing on 21
Existing Grazing Allotments,
Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest,
Elko County, NV.
Summary: EPA’s previous concerns
have been resolved; therefore, EPA does
not object to the proposed action.
EIS No. 20090449, ERP No. F–AFS–
F65076–MI, Niagara Project, To
Address Site-Specific Vegetation and
Transportation System Needs in the
Project Areas, Hiawatha National
Forest, St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie
Ranger Districts, Mackinac and
Chippewa Counties, MI.
Summary: EPA does not object to the
proposed project.
Dated: February 2, 2010.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2010–2572 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–8987–9]
Environmental Impact Statements;
Notice of Availability
Responsible Agency: Office of Federal
Activities, General Information (202)
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
564–1399 or https://www.epa.gov/
compliance/nepa/.
Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact
Statements
Filed 01/25/2010 through 01/29/2010
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
Notice
In accordance with Section 309(a) of
the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to
make its comments on EISs issued by
other Federal agencies public.
Historically, EPA has met this mandate
by publishing weekly notices of
availability of EPA comments, which
include a brief summary of EPA’s
comment letters, in the Federal
Register. Since February 2008, EPA has
been including its comment letters on
EISs on its Web site at: https://
www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/
eisdata.html. Including the entire EIS
comment letters on the Web site
satisfies the Section 309(a) requirement
to make EPA’s comments on EISs
available to the public. Accordingly,
after March 31, 2010, EPA will
discontinue the publication of this
notice of availability of EPA comments
in the Federal Register.
EIS No. 20100024, Third Draft
Supplement, USFS, 00, Southwest
Idaho Ecogroup Land and Resource
Management Plan, Updated
Information to Reanalyze the Effects
of Current and Proposed Management
on Rock Mountain Bighorn Sheep
Viability in the Payette National
Forest 2003 FEIS, Boise National
Forest, Payette National Forest and
Sawtooth National Forest, Forest Plan
Revision, Implementation, Several
Counties, ID; Malhaur County, OR
and Box Elder County, UT, Comment
Period Ends: 03/22/2010, Contact:
Pattie Sourcek 208–634–0700.
EIS No. 20100025, Final EIS, USACE,
NC, North Topsail Beach Shoreline
Protection Project, Seeking Federal
and State Permits to Allow
Implementation of a Non-Federal
Shoreline and Inlet Management
Project, New River Inlet, Onslow
County, NC, Wait Period Ends: 03/08/
2010, Contact: Mickey Sugg 910–251–
4811.
EIS No. 20100026, Final EIS, NOAA, 00,
Amendment 31 to the Fishery
Management Plan for Reef Fish
Resources, Addresses Bycatch of Sea
Turtles in the Bottom Longline
Component of the Reef Fish Fishery,
Gulf of Mexico, Wait Period Ends: 03/
08/2010, Contact: Roy E. Crabtree
727–824–5701.
EIS No. 20100027, Draft EIS, USFS, CA,
Big Grizzly Fuels Reduction and
Forest Health Project, Proposes
E:\FR\FM\05FEN1.SGM
05FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 24 (Friday, February 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6025-6026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2572]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-8988-1]
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 or https://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.
An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental
impact statements (EISs) was published in Federal Register dated July
17, 2009 (74 FR 34754).
Notice
In accordance with Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is
required to make its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies
public. Historically, EPA has met this mandate by publishing weekly
notices of availability of EPA comments, which includes a brief summary
of EPA's comment letters, in the Federal Register. Since February 2008,
EPA has been including its comment letters on EISs on its Web site at:
https://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html. Including the entire
EIS comment letters on the Web site
[[Page 6026]]
satisfies the Section 309(a) requirement to make EPA's comments on EISs
available to the public. Accordingly, after March 31, 2010, EPA will
discontinue the publication of this notice of availability of EPA
comments in the Federal Register.
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20090210, ERP No. D-FRC-A03087-00, Ruby Pipeline Project,
Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, Right-of-Way Grants (and/or
Temporary Use or Special Use Permits), WY, UT, NV, and OR.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to
perennial waters, wetlands, and impacts related to hydrostatic pipeline
testing. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090267, ERP No. D-AFS-J65546-MT, Bitterroot National Forest
Travel Management Planning, To Address Conflicts between Motorized and
Non-Motorized Users, Ravalli County, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to
watersheds and other resources. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090424, ERP No. D-USN-L11043-AK, Gulf of Alaska Navy Training
Activities, Proposal to Support and Conduct Current, Emerging, and
Future Training Activities, Implementation, Gulf of Alaska, AK.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to the
marine environment from the deposition of expended training materials.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20090211, ERP No. DS-AFS-J61114-CO, Vail Ski Area's 2007
Improvement Project, Proposed On-Mountain Restaurant from the top of
Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, Special-Use-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger
District, White River National Forest, Eagle County, CO.
Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
Rating NC.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20090224, ERP No. F-AFS-J65531-SD, Telegraph Project Area,
Proposes to Implement Multiple Resource Management Actions, Northern
Hills Ranger District, Black Hills National Forest, Lawrence and
Pennington Counties, SD.
Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the
need to develop a project level adaptive management plan.
EIS No. 20090406, ERP No. F-AFS-K65350-CA, Modoc National Forest
Motorized Travel Management Plan, Implementation, National Forest
Transportation System (NFTS), Modoc, Lassen and Siskiyou Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about vernal
pool and wet meadow impacts.
EIS No. 20090427, ERP No. F-NPS-F60009-MN, Disposition of Bureau of
Mines Property, Twin Cities Research Center Main Campus,
Implementation, Hennepin County, MN.
Summary: EPA commends the National Park Service for selecting the
environmentally preferred alternative, and recommends that the Record
of Decision clarify the future status of key cultural resources on
site.
EIS No. 20090440, ERP No. F-AFS-J61114-CO, Vail Ski Area's 2007
Improvement Project, Proposed On-Mountain Restaurant from the top of
Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, Special-Use-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger
District, White River National Forest, Eagle County, CO.
Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action.
EIS No. 20090446, ERP No. F-AFS-K65373-NV, Jarbidge Ranger District
Rangeland Management Project, Proposed Reauthorizing Grazing on 21
Existing Grazing Allotments, Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest, Elko
County, NV.
Summary: EPA's previous concerns have been resolved; therefore, EPA
does not object to the proposed action.
EIS No. 20090449, ERP No. F-AFS-F65076-MI, Niagara Project, To Address
Site-Specific Vegetation and Transportation System Needs in the Project
Areas, Hiawatha National Forest, St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie Ranger
Districts, Mackinac and Chippewa Counties, MI.
Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed project.
Dated: February 2, 2010.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2010-2572 Filed 2-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P