55832 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Notices 

2Western’s authority to issue a ROD is pursuant 

to authority delegated on November 16, 2011, from 

DOE’s Office of the General Counsel. 

network in and north of Chavez Pass. 

The RPMs included in the water 

resources section of the Final EIS would 

apply to the ditch network and wells in 

the wind park study area. With these 

measures, no permanent effects to the 

ditch network are expected. 

The property owner noted that KOP 5 

is located about 1.5 miles from his 

property, and commented that the 

Scenery Integrity Level would change 

from high to low, which the commenter 

maintained would be unacceptable on 

Forest Service lands. The Final EIS 

includes photo simulations from a key 

observation point (KOP No. 5) located 

near State Highway 87 southeast of the 

wind park study area near the owner’s 

parcel. No project facilities would be 

visible from KOP 5 located near the 

property owner’s parcel for the initial 

development phase. Based on an 

evaluation in the Final EIS of the views 

from KOP 5, views of the San Francisco 

Peaks would be partially blocked by 

some of the closest WTGs for the 

subsequent build-out phases. The Final 

EIS also indicates that the subsequent 

build-out phases for the proposed wind 

park would create a high visual contrast 

from this viewpoint. However, the 

nearest WTG would be located more 

than one mile from the property owner’s 

parcel in accordance with current 

County goals and policies. In addition, 

the views evaluated from KOP 5 are 

primarily outside of the Forest Servicedefined management objectives. The 

commenter’s concerns related to visual 

impacts do not present any significant 

new circumstances or information 

relevant to environmental concerns. 

In response to the property owner’s 

information on land ownership at KOP 

4, the property owner is correct that 

KOP 4 is located on Forest Servicemanaged lands. The photo simulation 

from KOP 4 simulates the proposed 

wind park as it would be seen from a 

point along Chavez Pass Road. WTGs 

are depicted at a height of 

approximately 430 feet, and a distance 

of approximately 1.7 miles from the 

road. As such, they are located within 

middleground views. The KOP 

represents a view into the proposed 

wind park, which is not located on 

Forest Service-managed lands and is 

therefore outside of the Forest Servicedefined management objectives for 

scenic resources. The Final EIS noted 

that the proposed wind park would 

result in visual contrast that ranges from 

low to high on private and state lands. 

Therefore, the location of the KOP on 

Forest Service managed land, versus 

state or private lands, do not present 

any significant new circumstances or 

information relevant to environmental 

concerns. 

The property owner expressed 

concerns that the views from KOP 6, 

west of the proposed wind park and 

near the transmission tie-line routing, 

would result in a significant, drastic 

change to a beautiful viewshed. This 

KOP is located on Forest Service Road 

125, along the eastern edge of Anderson 

Mesa, looking to the east. The Final EIS 

notes that the proposed wind park and 

transmission tie-line would introduce 

elements of form, line, scale, and color 

that would contrast with the otherwise 

natural valley floor. Therefore, the 

concerns expressed by the property 

owner do not present any significant 

new circumstances or information 

relevant to environmental concerns. 

The property owner noted that the EIS 

does not discuss Forest Service opinions 

of landscape changes on non-Forest 

Service land visible from Forest Servicemanaged lands. The purpose of the EIS 

is to disclose the environmental impacts 

from the proposed Project, not to 

provide Western or Forest Service 

opinions regarding developments on 

private land. For the reasons stated 

above in the discussion of visual 

impacts from KOPs 4, 5, and 6, the Final 

EIS adequately addresses the effects of 

views from Forest Service-managed 

lands towards the wind park 

development. 

Western does not have any 

jurisdiction over the siting of WTGs, but 

the owner of the parcel will have 

opportunities to provide additional 

input during the approval process for 

the General Use Permit that would be 

issued by Coconino County for the 

Project. 

Decision 

Western’s decision is to allow 

Foresight’s request for interconnection 

to Western’s transmission system at its 

Glen Canyon-Pinnacle Peak No. 1 and 

No. 2 transmission lines, and to 

construct, own, and operate a new 

switchyard.2 Western’s decision to grant 

this interconnection request satisfies the 

agency’s statutory mission and 

Foresight’s objectives while minimizing 

harm to the environment. Full 

implementation of this decision is 

contingent upon Foresight obtaining all 

other applicable permits and approvals 

as well as executing an interconnection 

agreement in accordance with Western’s 

Tariff. 

This decision is based on the 

information contained in the Grapevine 

Canyon Wind Project Final EIS and 

comments received on the Final EIS. 

This ROD was prepared pursuant to the 

requirements of the Council on 

Environmental Quality Regulations for 

Implementing NEPA (40 CFR parts 

1500–1508) and DOE’s Procedures for 

Implementing NEPA (10 CFR part 1021). 

Dated: August 28, 2012. 

Anita J. Decker, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2012–22316 Filed 9–10–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9726–9] 

Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and 

Equivalent Methods: Designation of a 

New Equivalent Method 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of the designation of a 

new equivalent method for monitoring 

ambient air quality. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) has designated, in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 53, a new equivalent 

method for measuring concentrations of 

PM2.5 in the ambient air. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert Vanderpool, Human Exposure 

and Atmospheric Sciences Division 

(MD–D205–03), National Exposure 

Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711. Email: 

Vanderpool.Robert@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with regulations at 40 CFR 

part 53, the EPA evaluates various 

methods for monitoring the 

concentrations of those ambient air 

pollutants for which EPA has 

established National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQSs) as set 

forth in 40 CFR part 50. Monitoring 

methods that are determined to meet 

specific requirements for adequacy are 

designated by the EPA as either 

reference methods or equivalent 

methods (as applicable), thereby 

permitting their use under 40 CFR part 

58 by States and other agencies for 

determining compliance with the 

NAAQSs. 

The EPA hereby announces the 

designation of a new equivalent method 

for measuring pollutant concentrations 

of PM2.5 in the ambient air. This 

designation is made under the 

provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2012 / Notices 55833 

amended on August 31, 2011 (76 FR 

54326–54341). 

The new equivalent method for PM2.5

is an automated monitoring method 

utilizing a measurement principle based 

on sample collection by filtration and 

analysis by beta-ray attenuation. The 

newly designated equivalent method is 

identified as follows: 

EQPM–0812–203, ‘‘OPSIS SM200- 

Dust Monitor’’ configured for PM2.5 with 

the US EPA PM10 inlet specified in 40 

CFR part 50 Appendix L, followed by a 

BGI Inc. Very Sharp Cut Cyclone 

(VSCCTM) particle size separator, 

operated for a 24-hour continuous 

sample period at a total actual flow rate 

of 16.67 L/min. using 47mm PTFE 

membrane filters, a TS200 temperature 

stabilizer and software version 1.04.16 

or later, in accordance with the OPSIS 

SM200 Dust Monitor Operation and 

Instruction Guide.’’ 

The application for equivalent 

method determination for the PM2.5

method was received by the Office of 

Research and Development on June 21, 

2011. This monitor is commercially 

available from the applicant OPSIS Inc., 

150 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1950, 

Chicago, IL 60601. 

Test monitors representative of this 

method have been tested in accordance 

with the applicable test procedures 

specified in 40 CFR part 53, as amended 

on August 31, 2011. After reviewing the 

results of those tests and other 

information submitted in the 

application, EPA has determined, in 

accordance with Part 53, that this 

method should be designated as an 

equivalent method. The information in 

the application will be kept on file, 

either at EPA’s National Exposure 

Research Laboratory, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711 or in an 

approved archive storage facility, and 

will be available for inspection (with 

advance notice) to the extent consistent 

with 40 CFR part 2 (EPA’s regulations 

implementing the Freedom of 

Information Act). 

As a designated equivalent method, 

this method is acceptable for use by 

states and other air monitoring agencies 

under the requirements of 40 CFR part 

58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. 

For such purposes, the method must be 

used in strict accordance with the 

operation or instruction manual 

associated with the method and subject 

to any specifications and limitations 

(e.g., configuration or operational 

settings) specified in the applicable 

designated method description (see the 

identification of the method above). 

Use of the method also should be in 

general accordance with the guidance 

and recommendations of applicable 

sections of the ‘‘Quality Assurance 

Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems, Volume I,’’ EPA/ 

600/R–94/038a and ‘‘Quality Assurance 

Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems, Volume II, 

Ambient Air Quality Monitoring 

Program’’ EPA–454/B–08–003, 

December, 2008. Provisions concerning 

modification of such methods by users 

are specified under Section 2.8 

(Modifications of Methods by Users) of 

Appendix C to 40 CFR part 58. 

Consistent or repeated noncompliance 

should be reported to: Director, Human 

Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences 

Division (MD–E205–01), National 

Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711. 

Designation of this new equivalent 

method is intended to assist the States 

in establishing and operating their air 

quality surveillance systems under 40 

CFR part 58. Questions concerning the 

commercial availability or technical 

aspects of the method should be 

directed to the applicant. 

Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, 

Director, National Exposure Research 

Laboratory. 

[FR Doc. 2012–22343 Filed 9–10–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2012–0035; FRL–9726–8] 

Announcement of Public Meeting on 

the Consumer Confidence Report 

(CCR) Rule Retrospective Review and 

Request for Public Comment on 

Potential Approaches to Electronic 

Delivery of the CCR 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of a public meeting and 

request for public comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) will be holding 

a public meeting on October 1, 2012, to 

listen to stakeholder comments on 

potential approaches for providing 

Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) via 

electronic delivery. EPA plans to 

discuss its analysis of electronic 

delivery and present potential 

approaches and considerations for 

stakeholders to evaluate when pursuing 

electronic delivery of CCRs. EPA invites 

the public to participate in this listening 

session. EPA has posted the draft CCR 

Electronic Delivery Approaches 

document for public comment on its 

Web site at http://water.epa.gov/

lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ccr/. The 

instructions for registration for the 

meeting are located in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this notice. 

DATES: The listening session will be 

held on October 1, 2012, from 1:00 p.m. 

to 4:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time. 

The 30-day public comment period 

starts September 11, 2012 and will end 

on October 11, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the EPA’s Potomac Yards North (Bldg. 

2), 2733 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 

22202, and will be open to the public. 

How to Access Information: Meeting 

materials, including the draft CCR 

Electronic Delivery Approaches 

document, will be emailed to registrants 

or they can be accessed through EPA 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2012–0035 

and EPA’s Web site at http://water.epa.

gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/ccr/; 

background information (including the 

CCR and Public Notification Rules) is 

available in this docket. Comments 

received on the ‘‘Preliminary Plan for 

Periodic Retrospective Reviews of 

Existing Regulations’’ are available for 

viewing in EPA’s Docket No. EPA–HQ– 

OA–2011–0154. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either 

electronically through www.regulations.

gov or in hard copy at the Water 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 Water 

Docket is (202) 566–2426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adrienne Harris, Drinking Water 

Protection Division, Office of Ground 

Water and Drinking Water (MC4606M), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460 at (202) 250–8793 or harris.

adrienne@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Meeting Registration 

Individuals planning on participating 

in the public meeting must register for 

the meeting at https://www.

horsleywitten.com/ccrretroreview. 

Registration for this meeting will end on 

September 26, 2012, or earlier if the 

meeting room capacity is reached. If 

there is additional space, on-site 

registration will be allowed on a firstcome, first-served basis. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES