Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 58 / Thursday, March 25, 2004 / Notices 15325

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2147.02, 

OMB Control No. 2070–0167.

ICR status: This ICR is a renewal of 

an existing ICR that is currently 

approved by OMB and is due to expire 

on September 30, 2004.

Abstract: OMB approved the 

information collection activities 

described in this ICR under OMB 

Control No. 2070–0167 on March 16, 

2004 in response to EPA’s emergency 

processing request. EPA requested 

emergency processing under section 

3507(j) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 

seq.), as implemented in OMB 

regulations at 5 CFR 1320.13, of the 

collection of information necessary for 

waiving pesticide registration fees as 

prescribed in the newly enacted 

Pesticide Registration Improvement Act 

of 2003 (PRIA). A copy of the emergency 

request submitted to OMB (EPA ICR No. 

2147.01) and the related OMB action 

notice approving that request has been 

placed in the docket identified under 

Docket ID Number OPP–2004–0092.

EPA sought emergency processing of 

the existing approval because the 

collection of information necessary for 

processing the fee waiver requests was 

needed prior to the expiration of the 

time periods established under the PRA. 

The collection of this information at the 

time the waiver is requested is 

necessary for the Agency to be able to 

waive the fees, and proceed with 

making a decision on the related 

application. The statute was enacted on 

January 23, 2004, with a statutory 

effective date of March 23, 2004, at 

which time the fee waiver requests can 

be submitted to the Agency. The 

statutory implementation time frame 

does not allow the Agency to follow the 

regular process for ICRs under the PRA, 

which includes two comment periods 

with 60 day and 30 day time frames. 

EPA asked OMB to take action on the 

emergency request within 2 work days 

of receipt, and asked that OMB approve 

the collection for the full 180 days 

permitted by the regulations.

The collection activities covered by 

this ICR will allow the Agency to 

process requests for waivers of fees 

under the PRIA by ensuring that those 

requesting the waivers provide EPA 

with appropriate documentation 

demonstrating that they meet the waiver 

criteria established in the PRIA. The ICR 

covers the collection activities 

associated with requesting a fee waiver 

and involves requesters submitting a 

waiver request, information to 

demonstrate eligibility for the waiver, 

and certification of eligibility. Waivers 

are available for small businesses, for 

minor uses, and for actions solely 

associated with the Inter-Regional 

Research Project Number 4 (IR–4). State 

and Federal Agencies are exempt from 

the payment of fees.

V. What are EPA’s Burden and Cost 

Estimates for This ICR?

Under the PRA, ‘‘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. 

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 ICR provides a detailed 

explanation of this estimate, which is 

only briefly summarized in this notice. 

The annual public burden for this ICR 

is estimated to be 21,600 hours for the 

first year of implementation, and 18,720 

hours in subsequent years. The 

following is a summary of the estimates 

taken from the ICR:

Respondents/affected entities:

Applicants for pesticide registration 

actions.

Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 360 annually.

Frequency of response: On occasion.

Estimated total/average number of 

responses for each respondent: 1.

Estimated total annual burden hours:

21,600 hours.

Estimated total annual burden costs:

$1,879,200.

VI. Does the Proposed Renewal ICR 

Include Any Changes Over the 

Emergency Approval?

The burden and costs estimates are 

the same, but the detailed description is 

new.

VII. 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 person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 18, 2004.

Susan B. Hazen,

Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[FR Doc. 04–6699 Filed 3–24–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–S

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[CA116–NOA; FRL–7639–8] 

Adequacy Status of the South Coast 

and Coachella Valley, CA; Attainment 

and Maintenance Plans for 

Transportation Conformity Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of adequacy 

determination. 

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is 

notifying the public that we have found 

that the motor vehicle emissions 

budgets contained in California plans 

for attainment of the 1-hour ozone, 

PM10, and carbon monoxide (CO) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and maintenance of the 

nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS in the 

South Coast, and attainment of the 

PM10 NAAQS in the Coachella Valley, 

are adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes. As a result of our 

finding, the Southern California 

Association of Governments, the Federal 

Highway Administration, and the 

Federal Transit Authority must use the 

motor vehicle emissions budgets from 

the submitted plan for future conformity 

determinations.

DATES: This determination is effective 

April 9, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

finding is available at EPA’s conformity 

Web site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/

transp/conform/reg9sips.htm. You may 

also contact Dave Jesson, U.S. EPA, 

Region IX, Air Division, AIR–2, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 

94105–3901; (415) 972–3957 or 

jesson.david@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

notice announces our finding that the 

following emissions budgets contained 

in the 2003 South Coast Air Quality 

Management Plan and the 2003 

Coachella Valley PM10 State 

15326 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 58 / Thursday, March 25, 2004 / Notices 

Implementation Plan, submitted by the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

on January 9, 2004, are adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes: 1-

hour ozone budgets for volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) for the years 2005, 2008, and 

2010, as part of the 1-hour ozone 

attainment plan for the South Coast Air 

Basin; PM10 budgets for VOC, NOX, and 

PM10 for the years 2003 and 2006, as 

part of the PM10 attainment plan for the 

South Coast; CO budget for CO for the 

year 2002, as part of the CO attainment 

plan for the South Coast; NO2 budget 

for NOX for the year 2003, as part of the 

NO2 maintenance plan for the South 

Coast Air Basin; and PM10 budgets for 

PM10 for the years 2003 and 2006, as 

part of the PM10 attainment plan for the 

Coachella Valley. EPA Region IX made 

these findings in letters to CARB on 

March 11, 2004. We are also announcing 

these findings on our conformity Web 

site: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/

conform/reg9sips.htm.

The methodology for estimating 

paved road dust emissions in the South 

Coast and Coachella Valley PM10 plans 

and budgets is consistent with EPA’s 

AP–42 emissions factors, with one 

exception: California did not use 

correction factor C in the current 

version of AP–42, which subtracts out 

MOBILE6.2 1980’s fleet exhaust 

emissions, brake wear, and tire wear. 

California-specific roadway silt loading 

inputs to the emission factor equation 

were derived from measurements by 

Midwest Research Institute. The 

unpaved road dust emissions factor was 

based on measurements performed by 

the University of California, Davis, and 

the Desert Research Institute. We are 

specifically approving the State’s 

reentrained dust methodologies for 

paved and unpaved roads for use in 

future conformity analyses. 

Transportation conformity is required 

by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. 

Our conformity rule requires that 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects conform to state air quality 

implementation plans (SIPs) and 

establishes the criteria and procedures 

for determining whether or not they 

conform. Conformity to a SIP means that 

transportation activities will not 

produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the national 

ambient air quality standards. 

The criteria by which we determine 

whether a SIP’s motor vehicle emissions 

budgets are adequate for conformity 

purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4). One of these criteria is that 

the plan provide for attainment or 

maintenance (as appropriate) of the 

relevant ambient air quality standard. 

We have preliminarily determined that 

the South Coast SIP submittal provides 

for progress and attainment of the 1-

hour ozone, PM10, and CO NAAQS, and 

maintenance of the nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2) NAAQS, and that the budgets 

associated with the plans are consistent 

with the plan and, therefore, can be 

found adequate. Similarly, we have 

preliminarily determined that the 

Coachella Valley SIP submittal provides 

for progress and attainment of the PM10 

NAAQS, and that the budgets associated 

with the plan are consistent with the 

plan and, therefore, can be found 

adequate. 

We have described our process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999 

memo titled ‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999 

Conformity Court Decision’’). We 

followed this guidance in making our 

adequacy determination on the budgets 

in the South Coast and Coachella Valley 

SIP submittals.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: March 12, 2004. 

Laura Yoshii, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doc. 04–6696 Filed 3–24–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–7640–2] 

Notice of Availability of and 

Opportunity To Provide Comment on 

Issues in the Staff Paper: An 

Examination of EPA Risk Assessment 

Principles and Practices

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

opportunity to comment. 

SUMMARY: Today, the EPA is announcing 

the availability of and an opportunity to 

comment on issues in an EPA staff 

paper titled ‘‘An Examination of EPA 

Risk Assessment Principles and 

Practices.’’

The paper is a product of an EPA staff 

review of how risk assessment is 

conducted at EPA. It also presents staff 

recommendations for EPA and 

interested parties to consider how EPA 

can strengthen and, where appropriate, 

improve its risk assessment practices. 

The EPA Science Advisor and other 

senior EPA officials requested this 

review to further the discussion and 

examination of some broad questions 

about risk assessment. The staff paper 

also discusses public comments relevant 

to EPA that were submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) in 

response to OMB’s request for public 

comment on risk assessment procedures 

in the Federal government (68 FR 5492–

5527, February 3, 2003). EPA assembled 

a group of risk assessment professionals 

from across EPA to examine EPA’s risk 

assessment principles and practices, 

and to prepare this paper. This paper 

does not represent official EPA policy. 

The staff paper will not be revised 

further. EPA is releasing the staff paper 

as the first step in a multi-step process 

by which EPA intends to engage 

interested parties in a dialogue about 

risk assessment principles and practices 

to improve the practice of risk 

assessment. Accordingly, EPA is 

requesting public comment on the risk 

assessment principles and practices 

described in the paper with the 

objective of identifying particular issues 

for future dialogue. Future dialogue on 

particular issues may come, for 

example, in discussions under the 

auspices of EPA’s Science Advisory 

Board, other consultative groups, and 

professional societies with a focus on 

risk assessment and with states, nongovernmental organizations, and tribal 

groups. EPA is interested in suggestions 

for other avenues for dialogue as well.

DATES: Comments must be received by 

June 23, 2004.

ADDRESSES: 

Document Availability 

The staff paper, ‘‘An Examination of 

EPA Risk Assessment Principles and 

Practices,’’ is available via the Internet 

from http://www.epa.gov/osa. 

Submitting Comments 

Comments may be submitted 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier. Follow the detailed 

instructions as provided in Unit II.A. of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. 

Viewing Public Comments 

Comments may be viewed 

electronically. Follow the detailed 

instructions as provided in Unit II.B. of 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information only, contact Dr. Kerry 

Dearfield, Office of the Science Advisor 

(8105R), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, telephone 202–

564–4499, or send electronic mail 

inquiries to science.advisor@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background Information 

The staff paper, ‘‘An Examination of 

EPA Risk Assessment Principles and