Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Notices 20847 

information submitted by the applicant 

in the application, EPA has determined, 

in accordance with part 53, that this 

method should be designated as an 

equivalent method. The information 

submitted by the applicant in the 

application will be kept on file, either 

at EPA’s National Exposure Research 

Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, 

North Carolina 27711 or in an approved 

archive storage facility, and will be 

available for inspection (with advance 

notice) to the extent consistent with 40 

CFR part 2 (EPA’s regulations 

implementing the Freedom of 

Information Act). 

As a designated reference or 

equivalent method, this method is 

acceptable for use by states and other air 

monitoring agencies under the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 58, 

Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For 

such purposes, the method must be 

used in strict accordance with the 

operation or instruction manual 

associated with the method and subject 

to any specifications and limitations 

(e.g., configuration or operational 

settings) specified in the applicable 

designation method description (see the 

identifications of the method above). 

Use of the method should also be in 

general accordance with the guidance 

and recommendations of applicable 

sections of the ‘‘Quality Assurance 

Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems, Volume I,’’ EPA/ 

600/R–94/038a and ‘‘Quality Assurance 

Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems, Volume II, Part 

1,’’ EPA–454/R–98–004 (available at 

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/ 

qabook.html). Vendor modifications of a 

designated reference or equivalent 

method used for purposes of part 58 are 

permitted only with prior approval of 

the EPA, as provided in part 53. 

Provisions concerning modification of 

such methods by users are specified 

under Section 2.8 (Modifications of 

Methods by Users) of Appendix C to 40 

CFR part 58. 

In general, a method designation 

applies to any sampler or analyzer 

which is identical to the sampler or 

analyzer described in the application for 

designation. In some cases, similar 

samplers or analyzers manufactured 

prior to the designation may be 

upgraded or converted (e.g., by minor 

modification or by substitution of the 

approved operation or instruction 

manual) so as to be identical to the 

designated method and thus achieve 

designated status. The manufacturer 

should be consulted to determine the 

feasibility of such upgrading or 

conversion. 

Part 53 requires that sellers of 

designated reference or equivalent 

method analyzers or samplers comply 

with certain conditions. These 

conditions are specified in 40 CFR 53.9 

and are summarized below: 

(a) A copy of the approved operation 

or instruction manual must accompany 

the sampler or analyzer when it is 

delivered to the ultimate purchaser. 

(b) The sampler or analyzer must not 

generate any unreasonable hazard to 

operators or to the environment. 

(c) The sampler or analyzer must 

function within the limits of the 

applicable performance specifications 

given in 40 CFR parts 50 and 53 for at 

least one year after delivery when 

maintained and operated in accordance 

with the operation or instruction 

manual. 

(d) Any sampler or analyzer offered 

for sale as part of a reference or 

equivalent method must bear a label or 

sticker indicating that it has been 

designated as part of a reference or 

equivalent method in accordance with 

part 53 and showing its designated 

method identification number. 

(e) If such an analyzer has two or 

more selectable ranges, the label or 

sticker must be placed in close 

proximity to the range selector and 

indicate which range or ranges have 

been included in the reference or 

equivalent method designation. 

(f) An applicant who offers samplers 

or analyzers for sale as part of a 

reference or equivalent method is 

required to maintain a list of ultimate 

purchasers of such samplers or 

analyzers and to notify them within 30 

days if a reference or equivalent method 

designation applicable to the method 

has been canceled or if adjustment of 

the sampler or analyzer is necessary 

under 40 CFR 53.11(b) to avoid a 

cancellation. 

(g) An applicant who modifies a 

sampler or analyzer previously 

designated as part of a reference or 

equivalent method is not permitted to 

sell the sampler or analyzer (as 

modified) as part of a reference or 

equivalent method (although it may be 

sold without such representation), nor 

to attach a designation label or sticker 

to the sampler or analyzer (as modified) 

under the provisions described above, 

until the applicant has received notice 

under 40 CFR part 53.14(c) that the 

original designation or a new 

designation applies to the method as 

modified, or until the applicant has 

applied for and received notice under 

40 CFR 53.8(b) of a new reference or 

equivalent method determination for the 

sampler or analyzer as modified. 

Aside from occasional breakdowns or 

malfunctions, consistent or repeated 

noncompliance with any of these 

conditions should be reported to: 

Director, Human Exposure and 

Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD–

E205–01), National Exposure Research 

Laboratory, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711. 

Designation of this new equivalent 

method is intended to assist the States 

in establishing and operating their air 

quality surveillance systems under 40 

CFR part 58. Questions concerning the 

commercial availability or technical 

aspects of the method should be 

directed to the applicant. 

Jewel F. Morris, 

Acting Director, National Exposure Research 

Laboratory. 

[FR Doc. E7–7997 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8306–3] 

Reissuance of General NPDES Permit 

(GP) for Alaskan Small Suction 

Dredging (Permit Number AKG–37–

5000) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final notice of reissuance of a 

general permit. 

SUMMARY: On June 4, 2007, a general 

permit regulating the activities of small 

suction dredge mining for gold placer 

mining operations in the State of Alaska 

expires. On January 16, 2007, EPA 

proposed to reissue this GP. There was 

a 45 day comment period. 

On April 4, 2007, the Department of 

Natural Resources, Office of Project 

Management and Permitting agreed with 

EPA’s consistency determination under 

the Alaska Coastal Management Act. 

The Department of Environmental 

Conservation certified the GP under 

section 401 of the Clean Water Act on 

April 16, 2007. EPA received several 

comments on the GP and has prepared 

a Response to Comments. EPA has 

determined that each facility submitting 

a new Notice of Intent (NOI) prior to the 

expiration date of the current permit 

will be automatically covered by the 

reissued GP. 

DATES: The GP will be effective on June 

5, 2007. Since coverage between the 

current GP and the reissued GP is 

continuous, there is no administrative 

extension of coverage under this GP. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
20848 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 80 / Thursday, April 26, 2007 / Notices 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the GP and the 

Response to Comments are available 

upon request. Written requests may be 

submitted to EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue OWW–130, Seattle, WA 98101. 

Electronic requests may be mailed to: 

washington.audrey@epa.gov or 

godsey.cindi@epa.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

GP, Fact Sheet, and Response to 

Comments may be found on the Region 

10 Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

r10earth/waterpermits.htm (click on 

general permits then on placer mining). 

Telephone requests for copies may be 

made to Audrey Washington at (206) 

553–0523 or to Cindi Godsey at (907) 

271–6561. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Order 12866: The Office of 

Management and Budget has exempted 

this action from the review 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

pursuant to Section 6 of that order. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: After 

review of the facts presented in the 

notice printed above, I hereby certify 

pursuant to the provision of 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) that the reissuance of this general 

permit will not have a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Moreover, the permit reduces a 

significant administrative burden on 

regulated sources. 

Dated: April 19, 2007. 

Michael F. Gearheard, 

Director, Office of Water & Watersheds, 

Region 10. 

[FR Doc. E7–7999 Filed 4–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL 

QUALITY 

The National Environmental Policy Act 

and Environmental Management 

Systems 

AGENCY: Council on Environmental 

Quality. 

ACTION: Notice of availability, Guide for 

Aligning National Environmental Policy 

Act processes with Environmental 

Management Systems. 

SUMMARY: The Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) is 

publishing ‘‘Aligning National 

Environmental Policy Act Processes 

with Environmental Management 

Systems—A Guide for NEPA and EMS 

Practitioners’’ to assist Federal agencies 

in aligning their National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

processes with their Environmental 

Management Systems (EMSs). CEQ used 

an interagency work group to develop 

the guide and finalized it after 

considering public comments. The final 

guide is available from CEQ and at 

http://www.NEPA.gov. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the guide can be 

requested from CEQ. Electronic or 

facsimile requests for a copy of the 

guide are preferred because federal 

offices experience intermittent mail 

delays caused by security screening. 

Send electronic requests to NEPA 

Modernization (EMS-NEPA) at 

horst_greczmiel@ceq.eop.gov. Fax 

written requests to NEPA Modernization 

(EMS-NEPA) at (202) 456–0753. Written 

requests may also be submitted to NEPA 

Modernization (EMS-NEPA), Attn: 

Associate Director for NEPA Oversight, 

722 Jackson Place, NW., Washington, 

DC 20503. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Horst Greczmiel at (202) 395–5750. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) established a National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Task 

Force and is implementing 

recommendations to modernize the 

implementation of NEPA and make the 

NEPA process more effective and 

efficient. Additional information is 

available on the task force Web site at 

http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/ntf. 

A proposed guide was developed to 

assist agencies with linking the NEPA 

process with Environmental 

Management Systems (EMS). CEQ 

requested public input and comments 

on the proposed guide, 71 FR 40520, Jul 

17, 2006. All comments received are 

available at http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/ntf/ 

implementation.html. 

The final guide is being provided to 

Federal agencies to help them recognize 

the complementary relationship of EMS 

and NEPA and assist in aligning EMS 

elements with NEPA when establishing, 

implementing, and maintaining their 

EMS. The guide encourages the 

integration of EMS and NEPA as a 

means to bring substantial benefits to an 

agency’s environmental performance 

and further our national environmental 

policy. For example: 

Commitments and mitigation measures 

established in NEPA decision documents 

(e.g., Findings of No Significant Impact and 

Records of Decision) can be tracked and 

monitored through the EMS. The EMS 

provides a framework to improve 

environmental performance in ongoing dayto-day operations through EMS ‘‘operational 

controls.’’ The tracking and monitoring of 

commitments and mitigation measures can 

contribute to training, internal auditing, and 

identification of appropriate corrective 

actions. 

A major component of the NEPA process 

is communicating and involving the 

interested public about a proposed action. An 

EMS can provide numerous opportunities for 

communicating with the public, and by 

providing information about the proposal 

under consideration, help focus public 

involvement. 

The guide assumes that the reader has 

a basic understanding of both the NEPA 

analysis and document preparation 

processes and the basic elements of an 

EMS. A reference list was added to 

provide readers the opportunity to 

increase their understanding of NEPA 

and EMS. In addition to editorial 

revisions, the guide was also revised 

substantively. 

CEQ specifically solicited public 

comment on the idea presented in the 

draft that a well constructed EMS can 

include the elements of the NEPA 

process and serve as the basis for 

complying with NEPA requirements. 

Numerous commenters interpreted this 

statement to mean that an EMS could 

replace the NEPA process, or took issue 

with such an approach. The final guide 

distinguishes between the typical NEPA 

process focus on proposed actions, and 

the typical EMS focus on ongoing 

activities and products and services. It 

states that NEPA and EMS are not 

functionally equivalent, but 

complementary. The guide highlights 

the complementary elements of NEPA 

and EMS and presents the conclusion 

that an EMS can provide a framework 

for an agency to better meet its NEPA 

responsibilities. 

Several commenters raised the 

concern that the requirements of NEPA 

are more extensive than those found in 

a typical EMS. The final guide uses 

public involvement as an example to 

emphasize that an EMS has to include 

the more rigorous NEPA requirements if 

the EMS will provide the mechanism to 

support and meet the NEPA process 

requirements. 

The guide describes specific ways 

EMS and NEPA processes can 

complement one another to improve 

how Federal agencies manage their 

impacts on the environment: 

• Identification of environmental 

aspects in the development of an EMS 

can build on the environmental aspects 

identified in a previous NEPA analysis 

of a facility, activity, program, or policy. 

Conversely, a new NEPA analysis can 

consider the identified environmental 

aspects in an EMS when assessing 

potential environmental impacts of a 

proposed action. The EMS can provide 

a platform to use the information 

collected and analyses performed in the 

NEPA process on a going forward basis 

during implementation of proposed 

actions. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES