21416 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices

and analysis, risk assessment

procedures, risk management practices,

and risk communication procedures that

will further protect human health.

The purpose of the new collection is

two-fold. First, the survey is needed to

continue to collect and update

quantitative information on the number

of advisories issued by states, territories,

and tribes annually, including detailed

information on species sampled,

chemical contaminants involved,

waterbodies under advisory (including

freshwater, estuarine, and marine

waterbodies), target populations to

which the advisory refers (e.g., pregnant

women, nursing mothers, and young

children), geographic location of each

advisory, and tissue residue data

supporting the states’ advisories. In

addition, the expanded questionnaire

portion of the survey will provide

information on monitoring procedures

used to collect and analyze fish

samples, risk assessment methodologies

used to evaluate fish tissue residue data

and issue advisories, and risk

communication procedures used to

communicate the human health risks of

consuming chemically-contaminated

species. From this information, EPA can

determine how to most effectively

provide assistance to state, territorial,

and tribal fish advisory programs to

improve effectiveness among

jurisdictions through the use of

appropriate procedures for sampling,

chemical analysis, risk assessment, and

risk communication. Completion of this

survey is voluntary and the information

requested is part of the state public

record associated with issuing the

advisories. Over the last few years, the

states have requested guidance from

EPA in their fish advisory programs and

a more comprehensive questionnaire

will provide the states with the

opportunity to identify those advisory

areas for which they most need EPA

assistance.

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 are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated electronic,

mechanical, or other technological

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submission of responses.

Burden Statement:

The annual public reporting and

record keeping burden for this

collection of information is estimated to

average 36.5 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; 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: State,

territory, and tribal environmental and

health agencies (50 states, District of

Columbia, 5 territories, and 36 tribal

agencies).

Estimated Number of Respondents:

92.

Frequency of Response: Annually.

Estimated Total Annual Hours

Burden: 3,358 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden (non-labor costs): $552.00.

Geoffrey H. Grubbs,

Director, Office of Science and Technology.

[FR Doc. 00–10035 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6583–9]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Submission for OMB

Review; Comment Request; Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act

(RCRA) Corrective Action Information

Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this document announces

that the following Information

Collection Request (ICR) has been

forwarded to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for review and

approval: RCRA Corrective Action

Information Request (EPA ICR No.

1939.01). The ICR describes the nature

of the information collection and its

expected burden and cost; where

appropriate, it includes the actual data

collection instrument.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before May 22, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

a copy of the ICR contact Sandy Farmer

at EPA by phone at (202) 260–2740, by

email at farmer.sandy@epamail.epa.gov,

or download off the Internet at http://

www.epa.gov/icr and refer to EPA ICR

No. 1939.01. For technical questions

about the ICR contact Heather Harris at

(703) 308–6101.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action

Information Request (EPA ICR No.

1939.01). This is a new collection.

Abstract: This information collection

is in response to an April 15, 1999

request from Congress concerning the

RCRA Corrective Action program.

Included in this inquiry were certain

questions which only the state offices

have the information to answer. EPA

intends to obtain this information from

the states by means of a questionnaire.

The questionnaire includes facility

specific questions on all RCRA Cleanup

Baseline facilities, enforcement orders,

state authority, and federal funding.

Responses to this request will be

mandatory and all information will be

used to respond to Congress and to

provide an accurate picture of the

current state of the program. 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

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 78 / Friday, April 21, 2000 / Notices 21417

EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR

part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15. The

Federal Register document required

under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting

comments on this collection of

information was published on 12/16/99;

2 comments were received and

discussed in the ICR.

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 7 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; 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: State

environment offices where RCRA

Corrective Action is authorized (33).

Estimated Number of Respondents:

1100.

Frequency of Response: One time

only.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

1068 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Capital

and Operating & Maintenance Cost

Burden: $0.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the following addresses.

Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1939.01 in

any correspondence.

Ms. Sandy Farmer, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of

Environmental Information,

Collection Strategies Division (2822),

1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW,

Washington, DC 20460;

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

EPA, 725 17th Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20503.

Dated: April 17, 2000.

Oscar Morales,

Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 00–10036 Filed 4–20–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–6253–5]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA Comments

Prepared April 3, 2000 Through April 7,

2000 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 09, 1999 (63 FR 17856).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–AFS–L65345–WA Rating

NR, Deadman Creek Ecosystem

Management Projects, Implementation,

Kettle Falls Ranger District, Colville

National Forest, Ferry County, WA.

Summary: EPA Region X used a

screening tool to conduct a limited

review of this action. Based upon this

screen, EPA does not foresee having any

environmental objections to the

proposed project. Therefore, EPA will

not be conducting a detailed review.

ERP No. D–BLM–K67051–NV Rating

EO2, Marigold Mine Expansion Project,

Implementation, COE Section 404

Permit, Special-Use-Permit, Humboldt

County, NV.

Summary: EPA expressed objections

with the project’s potential impacts to

surface and ground water quality from

mine facilities, including the postclosure pit lake; and to air quality,

especially from mercury emissions.

Additional information was requested

regarding impacts to water and air

quality, ecological risks, bonding and

closure, mitigation measures, and

geochemical characterization.

ERP No. D–BLM–L65338–OR Rating

EC2, John Day River Management Plan,

Implementation, John Day River Basin,

Gilliam, Grant, Wheeler, Crook, Harney,

Jefferson, Morrow, Sherman, Umatilla,

Union and Wasco Counties, OR.

Summary: EPA expressed concern

about the degraded environmental

conditions in the wild and scenic

corridor and the relatively minor

adjustments being proposed for land

management, which may not be

sufficient to protect/enhance the

resource values, or comply with state

water quality standards. EPA requested

that the plan include both

implementation and effectiveness

monitoring to measure progress in

meeting goals/objectives, and to enable

BLM and partners to make needed

adjustments.

ERP No. D–FHW–G40156–TX Rating

EC2, TX–130 Construction, I–35 of

Georgetown to I–10 near Seguin,

Funding, COE Section 404 Permit,

Williamson, Travis, Caldwell,

Guadalupe Counties, TX.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns regarding

impacts relating to farmlands,

relocation/displacement, air quality,

wetlands, and cultural resources. EPA

requested that additional information on

these issues be included in the final

document.

ERP No. D–FHW–G40157–TX Rating

EC2, Tyler Loop 49 West, Construction

from the TX–155 Highway to I–20

Highway, Funding, NPDES and COE

Section 404 Permits, Smith County, TX.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns regarding

farmland impacts, air quality impacts,

and noise impacts. EPA requested that

additional information on these issues

be incorporated in the final EIS.

ERP No. D–NPS–K65325–CA Rating

LO, Merced Wild and Scenic River

Comprehensive Management Plan,

Implementation, Yosemite National

Park and the EL Portal Administrative

Site, Tuolumne, Merced, Mono,

Mariposa and Madera Counties, CA.

SUMMARY: EPA had no objections to

the over all management plan, future

concerns might exist for specific tiered

projects.

ERP No. DA–AFS–L65155–00 Rating

EC2, Northern Spotted Owl

Management Plan, Updated Information

for Amendment to the Survey and

Manage, Protection Buffer and Other

Mitigating Measures, Standards and

Guidelines (to the Northwest Forest

Plan), Late-Successional and Old

Growth Forest Related Species Within

the Range of the Northern Spotted Owl,

OR, WA and CA.

Summary: EPA expressed concern

regarding project impacts for those

species removed from protection and/or

provided less protection than in the

original plan. EPA also expressed

concern about certain aspects of the

proposed management direction for

those species that will continue to be

covered by these Standards and

Guidelines and about the social/

economic implications of the plan.