22096 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2011 / Notices 

Act, 42 U.S.C. 7470–7492, 7501–7515, 

7411, 7661–7661f, and related state and 

federal implementing regulations at the 

following coal-fired power plants: The 

Allen Fossil Plant located in Shelby 

County, Memphis, Tennessee; the Bull 

Run Fossil Plant, located in Anderson 

County, Clinton, Tennessee; the Colbert 

Fossil Plant, located in Colbert County, 

Tuscumbia, Alabama; the Cumberland 

Fossil Plant, located in Stewart County, 

Cumberland City, Tennessee; the John 

Sevier Fossil Plant, located in Hawkins 

County, Rogersville, Tennessee; the 

Kingston Fossil Plant, located in Roane 

County, Kingston, Tennessee; the 

Paradise Fossil Plant, located in 

Muhlenburg County, Drakesboro, 

Kentucky; and the Shawnee Fossil 

Plant, located in McCracken County, 

Paducah, Kentucky. 

The alleged violations arise from the 

construction of modifications at units at 

these plants and operation of such units 

in violation of the requirements of the 

Act. EPA alleges that TVA failed to 

obtain appropriate permits prior to 

making major modifications and failed 

to install and apply required pollution 

control devices to reduce emissions of 

various air pollutants from units at the 

plants identified above. The CAFO 

assesses a civil penalty of $8 million to 

resolve these alleged violations. In 

addition to the $8 million proposed 

civil penalty TVA will pay to EPA, 

pursuant to the Consent Decree TVA 

will pay $500,000 to Alabama, $500,000 

to Kentucky, and $1 million to 

Tennessee to resolve alleged violations 

of the Clean Air Act and related state 

and federal implementing regulations. 

The Compliance Agreement addresses 

units at the eight plants identified above 

as well units at the following three 

plants that were not alleged to be in 

violation of the Clean Air Act or related 

state and federal implementing 

regulations: the Gallatin Fossil Plant 

located in Sumner County, Gallatin, 

Tennessee; the Johnsonville Fossil Plant 

located in Humphreys County, near 

Waverly, Tennessee; and the Widows 

Creek Fossil Plant located in Jackson 

County, near Stevenson, Alabama. The 

Compliance Agreement requires 

installation, upgrading, and continuous 

operation of pollution control devices 

on a number of the 59 units at the 11 

plants addressed in this Compliance 

Agreement. The Compliance Agreement 

also requires TVA to permanently shut 

down and cease to operate two units at 

the John Sevier plant, six units at the 

Widows Creek plant, and all ten units 

at the Johnsonville plant. Further, the 

Compliance Agreement imposes 

emissions caps that limit the total 

amount of nitrogen oxides and sulfur 

dioxide that can be collectively emitted 

by all 59 units at these plants. And, the 

Compliance Agreement imposes 

obligations that will reduce emissions of 

particulate matter. 

The Compliance Agreement requires 

TVA to spend $290 million for 

environmental mitigation projects in its 

service territory to mitigate the alleged 

adverse effects of its past alleged 

violations. Pursuant to the Consent 

Decree, TVA will fund an additional 

$60 million in environmental mitigation 

projects in Alabama, Kentucky, North 

Carolina, and Tennessee. 

Dated: April 15, 2011. 

Adam M. Kushner, 

Director, Office of Civil Enforcement. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9581 Filed 4–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0792; FRL–8855–8] 

Federal Plan for Certification of 

Applicators of Restricted Use 

Pesticides Within EPA Region 8 Indian 

Country; Notice of Availability 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing its 

intention to implement a Federal 

program to certify applicators of 

restricted use pesticides in areas of 

Region 8 Indian country. The program 

will be administered by EPA Region 8 

(EPA R8) located in Denver, Colorado. 

EPA is soliciting comments on EPA’s 

intent to implement a Federal 

certification program in areas of R8 

Indian country where no other EPAapproved plan applies and on its 

Proposed Federal Plan for Certification 

of Applicators of Restricted Use 

Pesticides within EPA Region 8 Indian 

Country (Plan). A separate proposal and 

public comment period for a Federal 

certification plan to address use of 

restricted use pesticides in Indian 

country outside R8 is forthcoming. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 6, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by docket identification (ID) 

number EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0792, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs 

(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. 

• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public 

Docket (7502P), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket 

Facility’s normal hours of operation 

(8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays). 

Special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Docket Facility telephone number is 

(703) 305–5805. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket EPA–HQ–OPP–2010–0792. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the docket 

without change and may be made 

available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

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 regulations.gov or 

e-mail. The 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 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the 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. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the docket index available 

at http://www.regulations.gov. 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 in the 

electronic docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the OPP 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2011 / Notices 22097 

Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– 

4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 

2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The 

hours of operation of this Docket 

Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy 

Bloom, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street 

(8P–P3T), Denver, Colorado 80202– 

1129; telephone number: (303) 312– 

6395; e-mail address: 

bloom.judy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

This notice applies to individuals and 

businesses who are seeking certification 

to apply restricted use pesticides (RUPs) 

as defined by EPA in Region 8 Indian 

country where no EPA-approved plan 

applies. Areas of Region 8 Indian 

country that currently have EPAapproved plans include the Indian 

country of the Cheyenne River Sioux 

Tribe, and the Mandan, Hidatsa, and 

Arikara Nation (or Three Affiliated 

Tribes). This action may, however, be of 

interest to those involved in agriculture 

and anyone involved with the 

distribution and application of 

pesticides for agricultural purposes. 

Others involved with pesticides in a 

non-agricultural setting may also be 

affected. In addition, it may be of 

interest to others, such as those persons 

who are or may be required to conduct 

testing of chemical substances. Since 

other entities may also be interested, the 

Agency has not attempted to describe all 

the specific entities that may be affected 

by this action. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD–ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD–ROM the specific information that 

is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the document by docket ID 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions. The Agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

C. Additional Sources 

In addition to the sources listed in 

this unit, you may obtain copies of the 

Plan, other related documents, or 

additional information by contacting: 

1. Judy Bloom at the address listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

2. Nicole Zinn, Field and External 

Affairs Division (7506P), Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– 

0001; telephone number: (703) 308– 

7076; e-mail address: 

zinn.nicole@epa.gov. 

II. What action is the Agency taking? 

EPA is announcing its intention to 

implement a Federal program to certify 

applicators of RUPs in areas of R8 

Indian country and seeks public 

comment. This Federal certification 

Plan describes the process by which 

EPA R8 will implement a program for 

the certification of applicators of RUPs 

in R8 Indian country based upon the 

certification requirements enumerated 

at 40 CFR part 171. The Plan, in its 

entirety, is included in the docket. 

III. Introduction 

A. What is the background for this plan? 

Under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), as amended, 7 U.S.C. 136 et 

seq., the Administrator of EPA has the 

authority to classify all registered 

pesticide uses as either ‘‘restricted use’’ 

or ‘‘general use.’’ Under FIFRA, 

pesticides (or the particular use or uses 

of a pesticide) that may generally cause, 

without additional regulatory 

restrictions, unreasonable adverse 

effects on the environment, including 

injury to the applicator, shall be 

classified for ‘‘restricted use.’’ Section 

3(d)(1)(C), 7 U.S.C. 136a(d)(1)(C). If the 

classification is made because of 

hazards to the applicator, the pesticide 

may only be applied by or under the 

direct supervision of a certified 

applicator. 7 U.S.C. 136a(d)(1)(C)(i), 

136j(a)(2)(F). If the classification is 

made because of potential unreasonable 

adverse effects on the environment, the 

pesticide may only be applied by or 

under the direct supervision of a 

certified applicator or subject to such 

other restrictions as the Administrator 

may provide by regulation. 7 U.S.C. 

136a(d)(1)(C)(ii), 136j(a)(2)(F). To be 

certified, an individual must be 

determined to be competent with 

respect to the use and handling of 

pesticides covered by the certification. 7 

U.S.C. 136i(a). 

It was the intent of Congress that 

persons desiring to use restricted use 

pesticides should be able to obtain 

certification under programs approved 

by EPA, as reflected in sections 11 and 

23 of FIFRA. 7 U.S.C. 136i, 136u. The 

regulations addressing Tribal and State 

development and submission of 

certification plans to EPA are contained 

at 40 CFR part 171. It is EPA’s position 

that Tribal and State plans are generally 

best suited to the needs of that 

particular Tribe or State and its citizens. 

Tribes and States, however, are not 

required to develop their own plans. 

Where EPA has not approved a State or 

Tribal certification plan, the Agency is 

authorized to implement an EPA plan 

for the Federal certification of 

applicators of restricted use pesticides 

pursuant to sections 11 and 23 of 

FIFRA. 7 U.S.C. 136i, 136u; 40 CFR 

171.11. 

EPA, Region 8 (EPA R8) has drafted 

a Plan for those areas of EPA R8 Indian 

country where no other EPA-approved 

plan applies. 

B. What is the statutory authority for 

this plan? 

The plan will be implemented under 

the authority of section 11(a)(1) of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2011 / Notices 

FIFRA, as amended by the Food Quality 

Protection Act of August 3, 1996, and 

regulations in 40 CFR 171.11. 

Additional enforcement authorities are 

found in sections 8, 9, 12 and 23 of 

FIFRA. 

C. Summary of the Plan 

1. Applicability. EPA intends to 

implement this Federal certification 

plan in ‘‘Indian country,’’ as defined in 

18 U.S.C. 1151, where no EPA-approved 

plan applies. ‘‘Indian country’’ is 

defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 as: 

(a) All land within the limits of any Indian 

reservation under the jurisdiction of the 

United States Government, notwithstanding 

the issuance of any patent, and, including 

rights-of-way running through the 

reservation; 

(b) All dependent Indian communities 

within the borders of the United States 

whether within the original or subsequently 

acquired territory thereof, and whether 

within or without the limits of a State; and 

(c) All Indian allotments, the Indian titles 

to which have been extinguished, including 

rights-of-way running through the same. 

Consistent with the statutory definition 

of Indian country, as well as Federal 

case law interpreting this statutory 

language, EPA treats lands held by the 

Federal government in trust for Indian 

Tribes that exist outside of formal 

reservations as informal reservations 

and, thus, as Indian country. Indian 

country associated with EPA R8 refers 

to land defined as Indian country at 18 

U.S.C. 1151 that is located in the States 

of Utah, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, 

North Dakota, and South Dakota. For a 

list of Federally recognized Tribes in 

EPA R8, see http://www.epa.gov/

region8/tribes/govern.html. 

2. Provisions of plan.—i. Why is 

Region 8 developing a Plan? The Region 

8 Plan will allow the certification of 

applicators and legal use of RUPs in R8 

Indian country where there are 

currently no mechanisms in place for 

such certification. RUPs cannot be 

legally used in Indian country unless 

EPA has explicitly approved a nonFederal plan for such area or issued a 

Federal certification plan for such area. 

To date, EPA has not approved any 

State plan for the certification of 

applicators of restricted use pesticides 

in any area of Indian country. Under 40 

CFR 171.10(a)(1), Indian Tribes may 

choose to utilize State certification 

programs for their areas, subject to the 

requirements of that provision. There 

only three areas of Indian country in R8 

for which there are approved nonFederal plans. 

ii. To whom will the Plan apply? The 

Plan will only apply to persons who 

intend to apply RUPs in those areas of 

R8 that are Indian country excluding the 

areas of R8 Indian country that currently 

have EPA-approved plans including the 

Indian country of the Cheyenne River 

Sioux Tribe, and the Mandan, Hidatsa, 

and Arikara Nation (or Three Affiliated 

Tribes). This includes Indian country 

within the States of Colorado, Montana, 

South Dakota, North Dakota, Utah and 

Wyoming. For a list of Federally 

recognized Tribes in EPA R8, see 

http://www.epa.gov/region8/tribes/

govern.html. 

In the event that the Federal 

applicator certification regulations at 40 

CFR 171.11 are revised, EPA R8 will 

revisit the Plan to determine if 

modification of this Plan is necessary. 

Currently, a national plan for 

certification of RUP applicators in 

Indian country is under development 

and EPA R8 will review the R8 Plan to 

determine if the EPA R8 Plan should be 

modified or continue to be 

implemented, when the national plan is 

final. 

iii. Certification procedures. To 

become certified to use RUPs in R8 

Indian country, applicators must submit 

an application form to the EPA R8 

Office as well as proof of a valid 

Federal, State, or Tribal certification. 

The Form is available at http:// 

www.regulations.gov under docket 

identification number EPA–HQ–OPP– 

2010–0723. 

In lieu of submitting proof of a valid 

Federal, State or Tribal certification, 

private applicators also have the option 

of showing documentation that they 

have physically attended and completed 

an approved training course and selfstudy evaluation. This ‘‘no-test option’’ 

for private applicators is required to be 

available by FIFRA for Federal 

certifications. Federal certification 

under this option is valid for four years 

from the date of issuance, unless 

suspended or revoked. 

Under 40 CFR 171.11(e), currently a 

Federal certificate expires 2 years after 

the date of issuance for commercial 

applicators and three years for private 

applicators, or until the expiration date 

of the original Federal, State, or Tribal 

certificate, whichever occurs first. A 

proposed rule is currently under 

development that will allow a Federal 

certification based on a valid Federal, 

State or Tribal certification, to expire 

when the original certificate expires, 

unless the certificate is suspended or 

revoked. Once the amendment is 

finalized, the Agency will utilize the 

expiration date of the original valid 

certification. 

EPA is proposing that the certification 

must be from a State or Tribe with a 

contiguous boundary to the area of 

Indian country. An exception will be 

included that the EPA Region has 

discretion to allow Federal certification 

under the plan based on a valid 

certification from another nearby State 

or Tribe. 

iv. Commercial applicator categories. 

EPA proposes to recognize the 

categories authorized in the original 

certificate, and commercial applicators 

will be authorized to apply RUPs in 

Indian country for uses covered in their 

underlying Federal, State or Tribal 

certificate. EPA is considering language 

that would exclude categories for 

sodium cyanide capsules used with 

ejector devices for livestock predator 

control and for sodium fluoroacetate 

used in livestock protection collars. 

Under this Plan, a Federal certificate 

would only include the sodium cyanide 

capsules and sodium fluoroacetate 

livestock protection collars categories if 

the relevant Indian Tribe for the area of 

Indian country at issue obtains its own 

registration for this product and 

conducts its own monitoring and 

supervision. 

5. Implementation. EPA will 

administer routine maintenance 

activities associated with 

implementation of this Plan and will 

conduct inspections and take 

enforcement actions as appropriate. 

States, Tribes, and other Federal 

agencies that issued a certification upon 

which this Federal certification is based 

are not approved or authorized by EPA 

to assure compliance in Indian country 

with the Federal certification provided 

by this Plan. 

EPA may, if appropriate, deny, 

modify, suspend, or revoke the Federal 

certificate under this Plan. The 

applicant or Federal certificate holder 

has the right to request a hearing if EPA 

decides to modify, suspend, or revoke 

the Federal certificate. If EPA decides to 

deny, revoke, suspend or modify a 

Federal certificate, EPA will notify the 

agency that issued the original 

certificate upon which the Federal 

certificate was based. 

If the Federal, State, or Tribal 

certificate upon which the Federal 

certificate is based is revoked, EPA R8 

will begin procedures to revoke the 

Federal certification. EPA may also 

begin procedures to suspend or modify 

a Federal certificate if the Federal, State, 

or Tribal certificate upon which it is 

based is suspended or modified. 

EPA will allow, during the 6 month 

period after publication of the final 

Plan, applicators to apply RUPs under 

the Plan in R8 Indian country only for 

the categories for which they already 

have a valid State, Tribal or Federal 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2011 / Notices 22099 

1Please see Section IX of the Plan and Unit 

III.C.2.d of this notice for commercial applicator 

categories recognized under the Plan, as there are 

proposed exceptions for sodium cyanide capsules 

used with ejector devices and sodium fluoroacetate 

used in livestock protection collars. 

2Although predicated in part on the applicator’s 

existing valid certification, any use permitted under 

this Plan is allowed and will be enforced only 

under Federal authority. 

3The most current version of the draft policy was 

published in the Federal Register for comment on 

December 15, 2010 (75 FR 78198; FRL–9239–4). 

certificate 1 if they submit a complete 

application to EPA R8 showing proof of 

a valid State, Tribal, or Federal 

certification.2

Beginning 6 months after publication 

of the final Plan, applicators who are 

covered under this Plan and have not 

received a written Federal certification 

from EPA R8 are prohibited from 

applying RUPs in R8 Indian country. 

IV. Specific Comments Are Sought 

EPA is seeking comment on the entire 

plan but would specifically like 

comment on the following issues: 

1. Federal certification for applicators 

with certificates from contiguous States 

or Tribes. EPA has proposed only 

issuing Federal certification to 

applicators with certificates from 

contiguous States or Tribes. This 

approach provides greater assurance 

that the applicator has training relevant 

to use on the contiguous Indian country 

(e.g., understanding of endangered 

species issues, geography, climate, 

crops, and pest pressure). However, this 

could present problems because the 

applicators wishing to apply in Indian 

country will have fewer options to 

obtain a certificate. To address this 

concern, EPA is proposing to limit the 

Federal certification for applicators with 

certificates from contiguous States or 

Tribes, but also include an exception 

that would allow the Region to accept 

a certificate from another State or Tribe 

as determined by the Region on a caseby-case basis. Should EPA proceed with 

this approach? What, if any, other 

options should EPA consider and why? 

2. Notification to Tribes. The Tribal 

Pesticide Program Council (TPPC) has 

requested that a notification provision 

be included in the Plan. This provision 

would require that applicators of RUPs 

notify the relevant Tribe before each 

application that is made in R8 Indian 

country. The Agency has questions as to 

whether this approach can be 

practically implemented without 

causing undue burden to applicators, 

the Tribes and the Agency. 

We are interested in obtaining 

comment regarding the relative value of 

this approach as an actual requirement. 

On the one hand, requiring notification 

to Tribes prior to application could 

provide Tribes some benefit in knowing 

where and when RUP applications 

occur. EPA is concerned, however, that 

requiring notifications may impose 

resource burdens on Tribes to receive 

and review such notifications. The 

TPPC suggested a possibility that EPA 

could receive these notifications and 

post them publically for Tribes to 

access. However, EPA is not likely to 

have the capacity or resources to receive 

these notifications. EPA also notes that 

Tribes wishing to receive prior 

notification may wish to consider 

including relevant notification 

requirements under Tribal law. The 

Plan notes that applicators certified 

under the Plan are responsible for 

complying with any applicable Tribal 

requirements. 

One alternative approach being 

considered is that EPA could post a list 

of Federal certifications issued under 

this Plan. As a matter of convenience, 

EPA could arrange the list by State such 

that certifications issues for all Indian 

country located in a particular State 

would be grouped together. This 

approach would provide EPA and 

Tribes easy access to the list of 

applicators who may legally apply RUPs 

within Indian country. EPA would like 

to know if this option would be useful 

to Tribes. 

Another approach being considered is 

to have the Tribes provide a contact 

person to the Web site so that 

applicators would know who to contact 

to learn of any applicable Tribal 

requirements for a particular Tribe. 

Would this option be useful for Tribes? 

Would it be burdensome? 

V. Consultation With Region 8 Tribal 

Governments 

In the absence of an EPA-approved 

certification program in areas of R8 

Indian country, EPA, consistent with its 

statutory responsibilities and the 

Federal government’s trust 

responsibility to Federally recognized 

Tribes, has worked with the Region 8 

Tribes, on a government-to-government 

basis, to appropriately develop a 

certification program that will help 

ensure the protection of human health 

and the environment in R8 Indian 

country. EPA has consulted with the 

Region 8 Tribes on conference calls, 

face-to-face meetings, and mailings to 

ensure development of a Federal plan 

that effectively meets the needs of the 

Region 8 Tribes and restricted use 

pesticide applicators in R8 Indian 

country. 

EPA drafted the R8 Federal plan in 

consultation with the Region 8 Tribes 

consistent with, among other things, the 

following policies, orders and guidance: 

EPA Policy for the Administration of 

Environmental Programs on Indian 

Reservations, November 8, 1984; EPA/ 

State/Tribal Relations (AntiCheckerboarding Policy), EPA 

Administrator William K. Reilly, July 

10, 1991; EPA Region 8 Policy for 

Environmental Protection in Indian 

country, March 14, 1996; Guidance on 

the Enforcement Principles Outlined in 

the 1984 Indian Policy, January 17, 

2001; Executive Order 13175, 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments, November 

6, 2000 which was reaffirmed by 

Presidential memorandum, Tribal 

Consultation, November 5, 2009; and 

the Proposed EPA Policy on 

Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribes, June 9, 2010.3

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act 

Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 

Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C.3501 et seq.), the 

information collection activities 

described in this document and the 

revised Information Collection Request 

(ICR), OMB Control No. 2070–0029, are 

currently going through the renewal/ 

amendment process and will be 

reviewed by the Office of Management 

and Budget. As part of this process, EPA 

is proposing to implement a revised 

form designed specifically for pesticide 

applicators who wish to be certified in 

Indian country. EPA estimates the 

paperwork burden associated with 

completing this form to be 10 minutes 

per response. Under the PRA, ‘‘burden’’ 

means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, retain, disclose or 

provide information to or for a Federal 

Agency. For this collection it 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; 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 

information collection activities and the 

form will be included in a separate 

public docket. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Education, 

Pests and pesticides. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
22100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 76 / Wednesday, April 20, 2011 / Notices 

Dated: April 12, 2011. 

Stephen A. Owens, 

Assistant Administrator, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9562 Filed 4–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9297–5] 

Notification of a Public Teleconference 

of the Science Advisory Board; 

Drinking Water Committee Augmented 

for the Review of the Effectiveness of 

Partial Lead Service Line 

Replacements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The EPA Science Advisory 

Board (SAB) Staff Office announces a 

public teleconference of the SAB 

Drinking Water Committee Augmented 

for the Review of the Effectiveness of 

Partial Lead Service Line Replacements 

(hereafter referred to as the ‘‘DWC Lead 

Review Panel’’) to discuss its draft 

advisory report entitled ‘‘SAB 

Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Partial 

Lead Service Line Replacements.’’ 

DATES: The SAB DWC Lead Review 

Panel will conduct a public 

teleconference on May 16, 2011. The 

teleconference will begin at 1 p.m. and 

end at 5 p.m. (Eastern Time). 

ADDRESSES: The teleconference will be 

conducted by telephone only. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any 

member of the public wishing to obtain 

general information concerning the 

public teleconference may contact Mr. 

Aaron Yeow, Designated Federal Officer 

(DFO), via telephone at (202) 564–2050 

or e-mail at yeow.aaron@epa.gov. 

General information concerning the EPA 

Science Advisory Board can be found 

on the EPA Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/sab. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SAB 

was established pursuant to the 

Environmental Research, Development, 

and Demonstration Authorization Act 

(ERDAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. 4365, to 

provide independent scientific and 

technical advice to the Administrator on 

the technical basis for Agency positions 

and regulations. The SAB is a Federal 

Advisory Committee chartered under 

the Federal Advisory Committee Act 

(FACA), 5 U.S.C., App. 2. Pursuant to 

FACA and EPA policy, notice is hereby 

given that the SAB DWC Lead Review 

Panel, a subcommittee of the SAB, will 

hold a public meeting to discuss a draft 

advisory report. The SAB DWC Lead 

Review Panel and the SAB will comply 

with the provisions of FACA and all 

appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural 

policies. 

Background: Exposure to lead through 

drinking water results primarily from 

the corrosion of lead pipes and 

plumbing materials. EPA’s Office of 

Water (OW) promulgated the Lead and 

Copper Rule (LCR) to minimize the 

amount of lead in drinking water. The 

LCR requires water systems that are not 

able to limit lead corrosion through 

treatment to replace the portion of the 

lead service line that it owns. When a 

water system replaces only a portion of 

the lead service line (the portion it 

owns), this is referred to as a partial lead 

service line replacement. OW has 

requested the SAB to review and 

provide advice on recent studies 

examining the effectiveness of partial 

lead service line replacements. OW 

sought advice from the SAB DWC Lead 

Review Panel on March 30–31, 2011 

[see Federal Register Notice dated 

March 10, 2011 (76 FR 13181–13182)]. 

Materials from the March 30–31, 2011 

meeting are posted on the SAB Web site 

at http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/ 

sabproduct.nsf/MeetingCal/

575DA9AD713DB98B8

52578410068B1C4?OpenDocument. 

The purpose of the upcoming 

teleconference is for the SAB DWC Lead 

Review Panel to discuss its draft 

advisory report. A meeting agenda and 

the draft SAB review report will be 

posted at the above noted SAB Web site 

in advance of the meeting. 

Availability of Meeting Materials: 

Agendas and materials in support of the 

teleconference will be placed on the 

SAB Web site at http://www.epa.gov/sab 

in advance of the teleconference. 

Procedures for Providing Public Input: 

Public comment for consideration by 

EPA’s Federal advisory committees and 

panels has a different purpose from 

public comment provided to EPA 

program offices. Therefore, the process 

for submitting comments to a Federal 

advisory committee is different from the 

process used to submit comments to an 

EPA program office. 

Federal advisory committees and 

panels, including scientific advisory 

committees, provide independent 

advice to EPA. Members of the public 

can submit comments for a Federal 

advisory committee to consider as it 

develops advice for EPA. Input from the 

public to the SAB will have the most 

impact if it provides specific scientific 

or technical information or analysis for 

SAB panels to consider or if it relates to 

the clarity or accuracy of the technical 

information. Members of the public 

wishing to provide comment should 

contact the Designated Federal Officer 

directly. 

Oral Statements: In general, 

individuals or groups requesting an oral 

presentation at a teleconference will be 

limited to three minutes. Interested 

parties should contact Mr. Aaron Yeow, 

DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail) 

at the contact information noted above 

by May 12, 2011, to be placed on the list 

of public speakers for the 

teleconference. 

Written Statements: Written 

statements should be supplied to the 

DFO via e-mail at the contact 

information noted above by May 12, 

2011 for the teleconference so that the 

information may be made available to 

the Panel members for their 

consideration. Written statements 

should be supplied in one of the 

following electronic formats: Adobe 

Acrobat PDF, MS Word, MS 

PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM– 

PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format. It is 

the SAB Staff Office general policy to 

post written comments on the Web page 

for the advisory meeting or 

teleconference. Submitters are requested 

to provide an unsigned version of each 

document because the SAB Staff Office 

does not publish documents with 

signatures on its Web sites. Members of 

the public should be aware that their 

personal contact information, if 

included in any written comments, may 

be posted to the SAB Web site. 

Copyrighted material will not be posted 

without explicit permission of the 

copyright holder. 

Accessibility: For information on 

access or services for individuals with 

disabilities, please contact Mr. Aaron 

Yeow at (202) 564–2050 or 

yeow.aaron@epa.gov. To request 

accommodation of a disability, please 

contact Mr. Yeow preferably at least ten 

days prior to the teleconference to give 

EPA as much time as possible to process 

your request. 

Dated: April 13, 2011. 

Anthony Maciorowski, 

Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Staff 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2011–9566 Filed 4–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES