21004 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 81 / Friday April 27, 2007 / Notices 

(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. In 

particular, EPA is requesting comments 

from very small businesses (those that 

employ less than 25) on examples of 

specific additional efforts that EPA 

could make to reduce the paperwork 

burden for very small businesses 

affected by this collection. 

What Should I Consider When I 

Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

You may find the following 

suggestions helpful for preparing your 

comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible and provide specific examples. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you 

used. 

3. Provide copies of any technical 

information and/or data you used that 

support your views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or 

costs, explain how you arrived at the 

estimate that you provide. 

5. Offer alternative ways to improve 

the collection activity. 

6. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the deadline identified 

under DATES. 

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, 

be sure to identify the docket ID number 

assigned to this action in the subject 

line on the first page of your response. 

You may also provide the name, date, 

and Federal Register citation. 

What Information Collection Activity or 

ICR Does This Apply to? 

Affected entities: Entities potentially 

affected by this action are S/L/Ts 

participating in this voluntary program. 

These government establishments are 

classified as Air and Water Resource 

and Solid Waste Management Programs 

under Standard Industrial Classification 

(SIC) code 9511 and North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

code 92411. No industries under any 

SIC or NAICS codes will be included 

among respondents. 

Title: Application Requirements for 

the Approval and Delegation of Federal 

Air Toxics Programs to State, Territorial, 

Local, and Tribal Agencies. 

ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 1643.06, 

OMB Control No. 2060–0264. 

ICR status: This ICR is currently 

scheduled to expire on September 30, 

2007. 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 in title 40 

of the CFR, after appearing in the 

Federal Register when approved, are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed 

either by publication in the Federal 

Register or by other appropriate means, 

such as on the related collection 

instrument or form, if applicable. The 

display of OMB control numbers in 

certain EPA regulations is consolidated 

in 40 CFR part 9. 

Abstract: This information collection 

is an application from State, territorial, 

local, or tribal agencies (S/L/Ts) for 

delegation of regulations developed 

under section 112 of the Clean Air Act 

(Act). The five options for delegation are 

straight delegation, rule adjustment, rule 

substitution, equivalency by permit, or 

state program approval. The information 

is needed and used to determine if the 

entity submitting an application has met 

the criteria established in the subpart E 

rule, codified as 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

E, in accordance with section 112(l) of 

the Act. This information is necessary 

and required for the Administrator to 

determine the acceptability of approving 

the S/L/T’s rules, requirements or 

programs in lieu of the Federal section 

112 rules or programs. Additionally, it 

is also necessary for the proper 

performance of our function, and will be 

used to ensure that the subpart E 

approval criteria have been met. The 

collection of information is authorized 

under 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information is 

estimated to average 341 hours per S/L/ 

T and 41 hours per application. 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 which have subsequently 

changed; 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 the Agency’s estimate, 

which is only briefly summarized here: 

• Estimated total number of potential 

respondents: 124 S/L/Ts 

• Frequency of response: One time 

per delegation request 

• Estimated total average number of 

responses for each respondent: 8 

• Estimated total annual burden 

hours: 41,577 

• Estimated total annual respondent 

costs: $1,816,490. This includes an 

estimated labor burden cost of 

$1,790,760 and operation and 

maintenance costs result from 

photocopying and postage expenses, 

which are a total of $25,720. 

Are There Changes in the Estimates 

From the Last Approval? 

We are in the process of reviewing the 

key assumptions in the ICR that affect 

the overall burden estimation. These 

include, the number of delegation 

activities expected to occur during the 

upcoming clearance period, the 

delegation options most likely to be 

used by the delegated S/L/Ts, and the 

burden associated with each of the 

options. Depending on the outcome of 

this review, there could be changes in 

the overall burden estimates. 

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. At that time, 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. 

Dated: April 20, 2007. 

Gregory A. Green, 

Director, Outreach and Information Division. 

[FR Doc. E7–8098 Filed 4–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL6686–4] 

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 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 81 / Friday April 27, 2007 / Notices 21005 

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 6, 2007 (72 FR 17156). 

Draft EISs 

EIS No. 20060541, ERP No. D–BLM–

L65529–ID, Pocatello Resource 

Management Plan, To Provide 

Direction for Managing Public Lands 

in the Idaho Falls Districts, Pocatello 

Field Office (PFO), Implementation, 

Several Counties, ID. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about the 

potential for adverse impacts to water 

quality, aquatic habitat and wildlife, 

additional roads and snowmobiles and 

off road vehicles. The Final EIS should 

consider mitigation to strengthen 

resource protection measures. Rating 

EC2. 

EIS No. 20060523, ERP No. DA–COE–

E39050–FL, Herbert Hoover Dike 

Major Rehabilitation Project, To 

Reconstruct and Rehabilitate Reach 2 

and 3, Supplement to the 1999 Draft 

EIS, Palm Beach, Glades and Martin 

Counties, FL. 

Summary: EPA supports the proposed 

rehabilitation of the Herbert Hoover 

Dike; however, EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about potential 

environmental impacts. Specifically, 

EPA expressed environmental concerns 

about potential impacts to wetlands, 

and requested additional information 

regarding the wetlands mitigation 

proposal. Rating EC1. 

EIS No. 20060512, ERP No. DS–BLM–

J02038–WY, Pinedale Anticline Oil 

and Gas Exploration and 

Development Project, Updated 

Information on a Proposal for LongTerm Development with Year Round 

Drilling, Sublette County, WY. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental objections about the 

project: The range of alternatives 

analyzed; adverse impacts to air quality; 

and adverse impacts to wildlife. EPA 

recommends that the Final EIS should 

consider available alternatives to 

mitigate significant impacts to the 

environment. Rating EO2. 

EIS No. 20070064, ERP No. DS–FHW–

G40129–AR, U.S. 67 Construction, 

U.S. 67/167 to I–40 West/I–430 

Interchange around the North Little 

Rock Metropolitan Area, New and 

Updated Information, Funding, 

Pulaski County, AR. 

Summary: EPA does not object to the 

proposed project. Rating LO. 

Final EISs 

EIS No. 20070143, ERP No. F–WPA–

J08027–SD, White Wind Farm Project, 

Construct a Large Utility-Scale WindPowered Electric Energy Generating 

Facility, Sherman Township, 

Brookings County, SD. 

Summary: No formal comment letter 

was sent to the preparing agency. 

EIS No. 20060522, ERP No. FA–COE–

E39054–FL, Cape Sable Seaside 

Sparrow Protection, Interim 

Operation Plan (IOP), Additional 

Information Alternative 7, Providing 

Additional Flood Control Capacity, 

Implementation, Everglades National 

Park, Miami-Dade County, FL. 

Summary: EPA supports 

implementation of the proposed 

operation plan, as it appears to be the 

best practicable solution to the Cape 

Sable Seaside Sparrow issue. 

Dated: April 24, 2007. 

Robert W. Hargrove, 

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. E7–8099 Filed 4–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6686–3] 

Environmental Impact Statements; 

Notice of Availability Responsible 

Agency: 

Office of Federal Activities, General 

Information (202) 564–7167 or http:// 

www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/. 

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact 

Statements 

Filed 04/16/2007 Through 04/20/2007 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 

EIS No. 20070157, Final EIS, MMS, 00, 

Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas 

Leasing Program: 2007–2012, 

Exploration and Development 

Offshore Marine Environment and 

Coastal Counties of AL, AK, DE, FL, 

LA, MD, MS, NJ, NC, TX and VA, 

Wait Period Ends: 05/29/2007, 

Contact: James F. Bennett 703–787–

1660. 

EIS No. 20070158, Final EIS, FAA, AK, 

Juneau International Airport, 

Proposed Development Activities to 

Enhance Operations Safety, Facilitate 

Aircraft Alignment, U.S. Army COE 

Section 404 Permit, City and Borough 

of Juneau, AK, Wait Period Ends: 05/ 

29/2007, Contact: Patti Sullivan 907–

271–5454. 

EIS No. 20070159, Draft EIS, COE, FL, 

Central and Southern Florida Project, 

Comprehensive Everglades 

Restoration Plan, Caloosahatchee 

River (C–43) West Basin Storage 

Reservoir Project, Restoration of the 

Ecosystem in Caloosahatchee Estuary, 

Lake Okeechobee, FL, Comment 

Period Ends: 06/11/2007, Contact: 

Susan Conner 904–232–1782. 

EIS No. 20070160, Fifth Draft 

Supplement, NOA, NC, Atlantic Sea 

Scallop Fishery Management Plan 

(FMP), Amendment 11, 

Implementation to Control Capcaity 

and Mortality in the General Category 

Scallop Fishery, Gulf of Maine, 

Georges Bank, NC, Comment Period 

Ends: 06/11/2007, Contact: Patricia A. 

Kurkul 978–281–9250. 

EIS No. 20070161, Final EIS, IBR, 00, 

Upper Rio Grande Basin Water 

Operations Review, Preferred 

Alternative E–3, To Develop an 

Integrated Plan for Water Operations 

at the Existing Facilities, NM, CO and 

TX, Wait Period Ends: 05/29/2007, 

Contact: Valda Terauds 505–462–

3584. 

EIS No. 20070162, Final EIS, FRC, LA, 

Kinder Morgan Louisiana Pipeline 

Project, Natural Gas Pipeline 

Facilities, Construction and 

Operation, U.S. Army COE Section 10 

and 404 Permits, Evangeline, 

Cameron, and Acadia Parishes, LA, 

Wait Period Ends: 05/29/2007, 

Contact: Andy Black 1–866–208–

3372. 

EIS No. 20070163, Draft EIS, BLM, ID, 

Eastside Township Fuels and 

Vegetation Project, Address the Forest 

Health, Fuels, Safety, and Watershed 

Issues, Elk City, Idaho County, ID, 

Comment Period Ends: 06/11/2007, 

Contact: Robbin Boyce 208–962–3594. 

Amended Notices 

EIS No. 20070055, Draft EIS, AFS, ID, 

Idaho Cobalt Project, Development of 

Two Underground Mines, a Waste 

Disposal Site and Associated 

Facilities, Approval of Plan-ofOperation, Salmon-Cobalt Ranger 

District, Salmon-Challis National 

Forest, Lemhi County, ID, Comment 

Period Ends: 05/24/2007, Contact: Ray 

Henderson 208–756–5231 Revision to 

FR Notice Published 02/23/2007: 

Extending comment period from 04/ 

24/2007 to 05/24/2007. 

EIS No. 20070063, Draft Supplement, 

USN, 00, Introduction of F/A 18 E/F 

(Super Hornet) Aircraft, Updated 

Information, Construction and 

Operation of an Outlying Landing 

Field, Naval Air Station (NAS) 

Oceana, VA; Marine Corps Air Station 

(MCAS) Cherry Point, NC, Comment 

Period Ends: 05/09/2007, Contact: 

Francine Blend 757–322–4332. 

Revision to FR Notice Published 02/ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES