62046 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 204 / Friday, October 22, 2004 / Notices 

inventory. This decrease is due to a 

downward re-estimation of the annual 

number of likely responses to this 

information collection, offset in part by 

an upward estimation of the burden per 

response. This change is an adjustment.

V. 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. 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.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: October 14, 2004.

Margaret N. Schneider,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[FR Doc. 04–23692 Filed 10–21–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6656–9] 

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) 564–7167. An explanation of the 

ratings assigned to draft environmental 

impact statements (EISs) was published 

in FR dated April 2, 2004 (69 FR 17403). 

Draft EISs 

ERP No. D–AFS–H65021–MO Rating 

LO, East Fredericktown Project, 

Shortleaf Pine Restoration, Forest 

Health Improvement, Treat Affected 

Stands and Recover Valuable Timber 

Products, Mark Twain National Forest, 

Potosi/Fredericktown Ranger District, 

Bollinger, Madison, St. Francois, and 

Ste. Genevieve Counties, MO. 

Summary: EPA expressed no 

significant concerns with the proposed 

project. 

ERP No. D–AFS–J65416–WY Rating 

EC2, Bighorn National Forest Revised 

Land and Resource Management Plan, 

Implementation, Big Horn Mountain 

Range, Bighorn National Forest, 

Johnson, Sheridan, Bighorn and 

Washakie Counties, WY. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns with the 

potential for adverse impacts to water 

quality, aquatic resources, and 

terrestrial habitat. EPA expressed 

concerns with cumulative impacts to 

fish and wildlife, including the Canada 

lynx from the preferred alternative 

which proposes an 85 percent reduction 

in Roadless Area and greatly increases 

road construction and other soil 

disturbing activities, which can 

adversely impact water quality. The 

Final EIS should consider including a 

road density standard and additional 

mitigation measures to further improve 

desired condition on grazing lands. 

ERP No. D–AFS–L65467–ID Rating 

EC2, Red Pines Project, Proposes to 

Implement Fuel Reduction Activities 

and Improve the Range of Watershed 

Activities, Nez Perce National Forest, 

Red River Ranger District, Idaho County, 

ID. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns with potential 

increases in sediment to waterbodies, 

compliance with water quality 

standards, inconsistency with the Total 

Maximum Daily Load for the South Fork 

Clearwater River, watershed impacts 

associated with the Proposed Action 

(Alternative B), impacts on Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) listed salmonids and 

the uncertainties associated with 

modeling projections. 

Final EISs 

ERP No. F–AFS–L65388–WA Crystal 

Mountain Master Development Plan, To 

Provide Winter and Summer 

Recreational Use, Special-Use-Permit, 

Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, 

Silver Creek Watershed, Pierce County, 

WA. 

Summary: The Final EIS addressed 

many of EPA’s concerns. However, EPA 

suggests that wildlife crossing structures 

be provided on SR 410 to minimize 

wildlife injury or mortality increase 

ecological connectivity where possible, 

and protect tribal treaty resources. 

ERP No. F–BLM–J65387–CO Silverton 

Outdoor Learning and Recreation 

Center, Authorization for Long-Term 

Use of 1,300 acres for Backcountry-type 

Skiing, Summer Recreation and 

Educational Activities, Amendment of 

the San Juan/San Miguel Resource 

Management Plan, San Juan County, 

CO. 

Summary: No formal comment letter 

was sent to the preparing agency. 

ERP No. F–COE–E32180–FL Miami 

Harbor Navigation Improvements 

Project to Study the Feasibility of 

Widening and Deepening Portions of the 

Port, Miami-Dade County, FL. 

Summary: EPA expressed concerns 

over the need for additional analysis of 

alternative channel widths, as well as 

construction techniques/designs. EPA 

also expressed concerns over the need 

for additional surveys of eelgrass habitat 

and an analysis of the physical capacity 

of the Key West ocean disposal site and 

the nature of the material to be used to 

construct the proposed artificial reefs.

Dated: October 19, 2004. 

Ken Mittelholtz, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, Office 

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 04–23689 Filed 10–21–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY

[OPP–2004–0205; FRL–7685–9] 

Pesticides; Implementation of Globally 

Harmonized System; Notice of 

Availability; Extension of Comment 

Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment 

period.

SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the 

Federal Register of August 25, 2004, 

announcing the availability for 

comment of a White Paper entitled, The 

Globally Harmonized System of 

Classification and Labeling of 

Chemicals: Implementation Planning 

Issues for the Office of Pesticide 

Programs. In response to requests from 

commenters, this document is extending 

the comment period for 45 days, from 

October 25, 2004, to December 6, 2004.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket 

identification (ID) number OPP–2004–

0205, must be received on or before 

December 6, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted electronically, by mail, or 

through hand delivery/courier. Follow 

the detailed instructions as provided in 

Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION of the August 25, 2004 

Federal Register document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Frances Lowe, Field and External 

Affairs Division (7506C), Office of 

Pesticide Programs, Environmental