Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Notices 26831

nonattainment area is not making

reasonable further progress towards

attainment, and that the additional

emissions from the proposed

polypropylene unit will adversely affect

the ozone situation. Ms. Orr also

submitted a letter supplementing the

petition on behalf of LEAN on January

5, 1999, and another letter on March 1,

1999, requesting that the Exxon permit

be reopened. The Region 6 Regional

Administrator also addressed the

second issue in a separate letter to the

Petitioners.

On April 12, 2000, the Administrator

issued an order denying the petition.

The order explains the reasons for

denying the Petitioners’ claims.

Dated: April 28, 2000.

Carl E. Edlund,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

[FR Doc. 00–11567 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6602–7]

Notice of Proposed Administrative

Settlement Pursuant to the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), Union Pacific

Railroad Wallace-Mullan Branch

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for comment.

SUMMARY: In accordance with section

122(i) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act, as

amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C.

9622(i), notice is hereby given of a

proposed administrative settlement with

the Union Pacific Railroad Company for

recovery of certain response costs

concerning the Union Pacific Railroad

Wallace-Mullan Branch in northern

Idaho. The settlement requires Union

Pacific to pay a total of $650,000 to the

Hazardous Substance Superfund. The

settlement includes a limited covenant

not to sue pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9607(a)

and provides for contribution protection

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9622(h). This

administrative settlement will be

superseded upon entry of a consent

decree lodged on December 23, 1999, by

the United States, State of Idaho, Coeur

d’Alene, and Union Pacific, Case No.

99–606–N–EJL (D. Idaho), or will

otherwise terminate three months from

the effective date of the administrative

settlement, unless otherwise agreed by

the parties to this settlement. EPA will

consider public comments on the

proposed administrative settlement for

thirty days. EPA may withdraw from or

modify this proposed settlement should

such comments disclose facts or

considerations which indicate this

proposed settlement is inappropriate,

improper, or inadequate.

DATES: Written comments must be

provided on or before June 8, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to Clifford J. Villa, Assistant

Regional Counsel, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200

Sixth Ave., ORC–158, Seattle,

Washington 98101 and refer to In the

Matter of Union Pacific Railroad

Wallace-Mullan Branch Notice of

Proposed Administrative Settlement.

Copies of the proposed settlement are

available from: Clifford J. Villa, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 10, Office of Regional Counsel,

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington, 98101, (206) 553–1185.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Clifford J. Villa at (206) 553–1185.

Authority: The Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation and

Liability Act of 1980, as amended

(‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i).

Sheila M. Eckman,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

[FR Doc. 00–11570 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6604–1]

Public Water System Supervision

Program Revision for the State of

South Dakota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The State of South Dakota has

revised its Public Water System

Supervision (PWSS) Primacy Program.

South Dakota’s PWSS program,

administered by the Drinking Water

Program of the South Dakota

Department of Environment and Natural

Resources (DENR), has adopted

regulations for lead and copper in

drinking water that correspond to the

National Primary Drinking Water

Regulations (NPDWR) in 40 CFR part

141 Subpart I (56 FR 26460–26564). The

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

published a proposed primacy revision

on August 16, 1999 at 64 FR 44521 and

provided for public comment. The EPA

also held a public hearing on December

2, 1999, in Badlands National Park,

South Dakota (64 FR 61109). No

comments were received regarding

PWSS program issues. The EPA has

completed its review of South Dakota’s

primacy revisions and has determined

that they are no less stringent than the

NPDWR. EPA therefore approves South

Dakota’s primacy revisions for the Lead

and Copper Rule.

Today’s approval action does not

extend to public water systems in

Indian Country as that term is defined

in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Please see

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, Item B.

DATES: This primacy revision approval

will be effective June 8, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Himmelbauer, Municipal Systems

Unit, EPA Region 8 (8P–W–MS), 999

18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado

80202–2466, telephone 303–312–6263.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why Are Revisions to State

Programs Necessary?

States which have received primacy

from EPA under the SDWA must

maintain a safe drinking water program

that is equivalent to, consistent with,

and no less stringent than the Federal

program. As the Federal program

changes, States must change their

program and ask EPA to approve the

revisions to their programs. Changes to

State programs may be necessary when

Federal or State statutory or regulatory

authority is modified or when certain

other changes occur.

B. How Does Today’s Action Affect

Indian Country (18 U.S.C. Section 1151)

in South Dakota?

South Dakota is not authorized to

carry out its Public Water System

Supervision program in Indian country,

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

includes, but is not limited to: Lands

within the exterior boundaries of the

following Indian Reservations located

within the State of South Dakota:

a. Cheyenne River Indian Reservation.

b. Crow Creek Indian Reservation.

c. Flandreau Indian Reservation.

d. Lower Brule Indian Reservation.

e. Pine Ridge Indian Reservation.

f. Rosebud Indian Reservation.

g. Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

h. Yankton Indian Reservation.

EPA held a public hearing on

December 2, 1999, in Badlands National

Park, South Dakota, and accepted public

comments on the question of the

location and extent of Indian country

within the State of South Dakota. In a

forthcoming Federal Register notice,

EPA will respond to comments and

more specifically identify Indian

country areas in the State of South

Dakota.

26832 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 90 / Tuesday, May 9, 2000 / Notices

C. Reviewing Documents and Public

Comments

All documents relating to this

determination are available for

inspection at the following locations: (1)

U.S. EPA Region 8, Municipal Systems

Unit, 999 18th Street (4th floor), Denver,

Colorado 80202–2466; (2) South Dakota

Department of Environment and Natural

Resources, Drinking Water Program, 523

East Capital Avenue, Pierre, South

Dakota 57501.

Dated: May 1, 2000.

Jack W. McGraw,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.

[FR Doc. 00–11565 Filed 5–8–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Notice of Public Information

Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the

Federal Communications Commission,

Comments Requested

May 1, 2000.

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications

Commission, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork burden

invites the general public and other

Federal agencies to take this

opportunity to comment on the

following information collection, as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13. An

agency may not conduct or sponsor a

collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid control

number. No person shall be subject to

any penalty for failing to comply with

a collection of information subject to the

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that

does not display a valid control number.

Comments are requested concerning (a)

Whether the proposed collection of

information is necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

Commission, including whether the

information shall have practical utility;

(b) the accuracy of the Commission’s

burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance

the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information collected; and (d) ways to

minimize the burden of the collection of

information on the respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

DATES: Written comments should be

submitted on or before July 10, 2000. If

you anticipate that you will be

submitting comments, but find it

difficult to do so within the period of

time allowed by this notice, you should

advise the contact listed below as soon

as possible.

ADDRESSES: Direct all comments to Les

Smith, Federal Communications

Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W.,

Room 1–A804, Washington, DC 20554

or via the Internet to lesmith@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information or copies of the

information collections contact Les

Smith at (202) 418–0217 or via the

Internet at lesmith@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

OMB Control Number: 3060–0697.

Title: Revision of Part 22 and Part 90

of the Commission’s Rules to Facilitate

Future Development of Paging Systems

(Second Report and Order and Further

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Memorandum Opinion and Order on

Reconsideration and Third Report and

Order).

Form Numbers: FCC Forms 601, 602

and 603.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit; individuals or households; notfor-profit institutions; and state, local or

tribal Government.

Number of Respondents: 600.

Estimated Time Per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: On occasion

reporting requirement and

recordkeeping requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 600 hours.

Total Annual Cost: N/A.

Needs and Uses: This collection is

necessary to: lessen the administrative

burden of licensees; determine the

partitioned service areas and geographic

area licensee’s remaining service area of

parties to an agreement; determine

whether geographic area licensee and

parties to agreements have met the

applicable coverage requirements for

their service areas; to determine

whether the applicant is eligible to

receive bidding credit as a small

business; determine the real parties

interest of any joint bidding agreements;

and determine the appropriate unjust

enrichment compensation to be remitted

to the government.

OMB Control Number: 3060–0890.

Title: Settlement Agreements Among

Parties in Contested Licensing Cases.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit, individuals or households.

Number of Respondents: 45.

Estimated Time Per Response: 3

hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion.

Total Annual Burden: 115 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $7,650.

Needs and Uses: This collection

requires that parties to certain

settlement agreements obtain

Commission approval before the

settlement agreements take place. Each

request for approval of a settlement

must contain specific additional

information and must also include a list

of all applications and pleadings that

were filed in the contested case or

copies of them. Also, requests must

include a summary of the contested case

to include a full explanation of the

issues raised in the case. Finally, the

case involves an alleged violation of the

rules, it must include either a waiver of

a statement as to why a violation didn’t

or wouldn’t occur.

OMB Control Number: 3060–0765.

Title: Revision of Part 22 and Part 90

of the Commission’s Rules to Facilitate

Future Development of Paging Systems

(Further Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking).

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit; individuals or households; notfor-profit institutions; federal

government; and state, local or tribal

government.

Number of Respondents: 50,000.

Estimated Time Per Response: 3

hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion

reporting requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 56,250 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $25,101,875.

Needs and Uses: This proceeding will

further establish a regulatory scheme for

the common carrier paging (CCP) and

private carrier paging (PCP) services

which will promote efficient licensing

and competition in the commercial

mobile radio marketplace. The

information will be used by

Commission personnel to determine if

the licensee is a qualifying entity to

obtain a partitioned license or

disaggregated spectrum. Without such

information, the Commission could not

determine whether the licensee is

operating in compliance with the

Commission’s rules.

OMB Control Number: 3060–0270.

Title: Section 90.443, Content of

Station Records.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for

profit, individual or households, notfor-profit institutions, and state, local

and tribal government.

Number of Respondents: 57,410.

Estimated Time Per Response: .083

hours.

Frequency of Response:

Recordkeeping requirement.