Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 177 / Friday, September 12, 1997 / Notices 48087

injection well. Class II wells dispose

(via injection) of fluids that are brought

to the surface in connection with

natural gas storage operations or

primary oil or natural gas development

and production. These fluids may be

commingled with waste waters from gas

plants which are an integral part of

production operations, unless these

fluids are classified as a hazardous

waste at the time of production. Class II

wells also may inject fluids for

enhanced recovery of oil or natural gas

or for storage of hydrocarbons which are

liquid at standard temperature and

pressure. (See 40 CFR Section 144.6.)

If the application by the Fort Peck

Tribes is approved, the Tribes would be

responsible for regulating injection into

Class II wells. The program described in

the Tribes’ application would require

that any injection into Class II wells be

done in compliance with Triballyissued permits, which will include

technical requirements for the

protection of USDWs. These

requirements include criteria for

construction, testing, operation,

monitoring, and abandonment of Class

II injection wells. At present, there are

approximately 28 Class II injection

wells on the Fort Peck Indian

Reservation.

The EPA has held primary

enforcement authority for the UIC

program on the Fort Peck Indian

Reservation in Montana since the

program was implemented in 1984. If

the Tribes’ application is approved, the

Tribes would assume primary

enforcement authority (except for the

authority to take criminal actions

against non-Indians, which the EPA

would retain) for the regulation of all

Class II injection wells on all lands

within the exterior boundaries of the

Fort Peck Indian Reservation. The EPA

would retain regulatory and

enforcement authority for all other

classes of injection wells. However, the

Tribes would not be prevented from

implementing any more stringent

enforcement program of their own for

any type of injection wells.

The Tribes’ submission includes a

proposed Tribal Code, a program

description, copies of all applicable

rules and forms, statements from Tribal

counsel, and a proposed memorandum

of agreement between the EPA and the

Tribes.

Dated: September 4, 1997.

Kerrigan G. Clough,

Assistant Regional Administrator, Office of

Pollution Prevention, State and Tribal

Assistance, Region VIII, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency.

[FR Doc. 97–24146 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5484–3]

Environmental Impact Statements;

Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal

Activities, General Information (202)

564–7167 or (202) 564–7153. Weekly

receipt of Environmental Impact

Statements filed September 2, 1997

through September 5, 1997 pursuant to

40 CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 970350, Draft EIS, COE, CA,

Upper Guadalupe River Feasibility

Study, Flood Control Protection,

Construction, National Economic

Development Plan (NED), Santa Clara

Valley Water District, City of San Jose,

Santa Clara County, CA, Due: October

27, 1997, Contact: William DeJager

(415) 977–8670.

EIS No. 970351, Draft EIS, BLM, NV,

Olinghouse Mine Project,

Construction of Two Open Pits, Waste

Dump, Haul Road and Cyanide Heap

Leach Pads, Plan-of-Operation, Carson

City, Washoe County, NV, Due:

November 14, 1997, Contact: Terri

Knutson (702) 885–6156.

EIS No. 970352, Draft EIS, FHW, WA,

NE 8TH/I–405 Interchange Project,

Construction, Funding, Right-of-Way

Use Permit and NPDES Stormwater

Permit, City of Bellevue, King County,

WA, Due: October 27, 1997, Contact:

Gene Fong (425) 452–6827.

EIS No. 970353, Draft Supplement, COE,

CA, Sacramento River Bank

Protection Project, Implemention of

Streambank Protection for the Lower

American River between RM–0 and

13.7, Updated Information, City of

Sacramento, Sacramento County, CA,

Due: October 27, 1997, Contact: Matt

Davis (916) 557–1534.

EIS No. 970354, Final EIS, AFS, WA,

Long Draw Salvage Sale,

Implementation, Okanogan National

Forest, Tonasket Ranger District,

Okanogan County, WA, Due: October

14, 1997, Contact: John Townsley

(509) 826–3568.

EIS No. 970355, Final EIS, AFS, AZ,

Eastern Roosevelt Lake Watershed

Analysis Area Grazing Strategy and

Associated Range Improvements

Management Plan, Development and

Implementation, Tonto National

Forest, Tonto Basin Ranger District,

Gila County, AZ, Due: October 14,

1997, Contact: Linny Warren (520)

467–3200.

EIS No. 970356, Final EIS, FHW, VA,

DC, MD, Woodrow Wilson Bridge

Improvement, I–95 from the

Telegraph Road/Capital Beltway

Interchange in Alexandria, VA to the

MD–210/Capital Beltway Interchange

in Oxon Hill, MD, Funding, Section

10 and 404 Permits and CGD Bridge

Permit, Fairfax County, VA; Prince

George’s County, MD, and DC, Due:

October 14, 1997, Contact: David C.

Lawton (410) 962–0077.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 970290, Final EIS, FHW, CO,

CO–82 Highway Transportation Project,

Improvements to ‘‘Entrance to Aspen’’,

Funding and COE Section 404 Permit,

City of Aspen, Pitkin County, CO, Due:

October 6, 1997, Contact: Ron Speral

(303) 969–6737. Published FR–09–12–

97—Review Period Reestablished.

Dated: September 9, 1997.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–24240 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5892–2]

National Drinking Water Advisory

Council Operator Certification Working

Group; Notice of Open Meeting

Under section 10(a)(2) of Public Law

92–423, ‘‘The Federal Advisory

Committee Act,’’ notice is hereby given

that a meeting of the Operator

Certification Working Group of the

National Drinking Water Advisory

Council, established under the Safe

Drinking Water Act, as amended (42

U.S.C. S300f et seq.), will be held on

September 22, 1997, from 10 a.m. to 5

p.m., and on September 23, 1997, from

9 a.m. to 5 p.m. in Meeting Room 4, at

the Renaissance Washington D.C. Hotel,

999 9th Street, NW, Washington, DC.

The meeting is open to the public to

observe, but due to past experience,

seating will be limited.

The purpose of this meeting is to

discuss the key standards for a State

operator certification program. The

working group members are meeting to

discuss and comment on proposed issue

papers for deliberation by the advisory

council. Statements from the public will
48088 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 177 / Friday, September 12, 1997 / Notices

be taken at the end of the meeting if

time allows.

For more information, please contact

Richard Naylor, Designated Federal

Officer, Operator Certification Working

Group, U.S. EPA, Office of Ground

Water and Drinking Water (4606), 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

The telephone number is (202) 260–

5135 and to e-mail address is

naylor.richardopamail.epa.gov.

Dated: September 9, 1997.

Charlene Shaw,

Designated Federal Officer, National Drinking

Water Advisory Council.

[FR Doc. 97–24238 Filed 9–11–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

Public Information Collection(s) Being

Reviewed by the Federal

Communications Commission

September 8, 1997.

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(s), 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 November 12,

1997. 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 Judy

Boley, Federal Communications

Commission, Room 234, 1919 M St.,

N.W., Washington, DC 20554 or via

internet to jboley@fcc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

additional information or copies of the

information collections contact Judy

Boley at 202–418–0214 or via internet at

jboley@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Approval No.: 3060–0704.

Title: Policy and Rules Concerning the

Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace,

Implementation of Section 254(g) of the

Communications Act of 1934, as

amended, CC Docket No. 96–61.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a

currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities.

Number of Respondents: 519.

Estimated Hour Per Response: 146

hours per response (average).

Frequency of Response: On occasion,

annual one-time reporting requirement.

Cost to Respondents: $435,000.

Estimated Total Annual Burden:

75,895 hours.

Needs and Uses: In the Order on

Reconsideration issued in CC Docket

96–61 (released 8/20/97), the

Commission amended the collections

adopted in the Second Report and Order

in this proceeding.

a. Tariff cancellation requirement: In

the Order on Reconsideration, the

Commission concludes that, with two

exceptions, the statutory forbearance

criteria in Section 10 of the

Communications Act, as amended, are

met for the Commission no longer to

require or allow nondominant

interexchange carriers to file tariffs

pursuant to Section 203 for their

interstate, domestic, interexchange

services. The Commission further

concludes that nondominant

interexchange carriers are allowed to

file tariffs for: (1) Their interstate,

domestic, interexchange direct-dial

services to which end-users obtain

access by dialing a carrier’s carrier

access code (dial-around 1+services),

and (2) interstate, domestic,

interexchange services provided by a

nondominant interexchange carrier for

the lesser period of the initial 45 days

of service or until there is a written

contract between the carrier and the

customer, in those limited

circumstances in which a prospective

customer contacts the LEC to select an

interexchange carrier or to initiate a

change in his or her primary carrier. See

47 CFR Section 61.20.

In order to implement the

Commission’s detariffing policy, the

Second Report and Order requires

nondominant interexchange carriers to

cancel their tariffs for interstate,

domestic, interexchange services on file

with the Commission within nine

months of the effective date of that

Order. That requirement, however, was

not implemented by the carriers in light

of the stay of the Second Report and

Order, pending judicial review, entered

by the United States Court of Appeals

for the District of Columbia Circuit on

February 13, 1997. The Order on

Reconsideration provides that the

Common Carrier Bureau will determine

the appropriate transition period when

the detariffing rules become effective.

Nondominant interexchange carriers

that have on file with the Commission

tariff offerings that contain services

subject to different tariffing

requirements (e.g., tariff offerings that

include dial-around 1+services and

service to new customers that contact

the LEC to select an interexchange

carrier or to initiate a change in their

primary interexchange carrier, for which

carriers are permitted to file tariffs, and

tariff offerings that combine

international services, which still must

be tariffed, with interstate, domestic,

interexchange services, which are

detariffed), may comply with the Order

on Reconsideration either by: (1)

Cancelling the entire tariff and refiling

a new tariff for only those services for

which tariffs are required or permitted

(519 respondents × 2 hours per page =

2504 annual burden hours); or (2)

issuing revised pages cancelling the

material in the tariffs that pertain to

those services subject to forbearance

(519 respondents × 2 hours per page =

72,094 burden hours).

b. Information disclosure

requirement: The Order on

Reconsideration eliminates the

requirement that nondominant

interexchange carriers make information

on current rates, terms, and conditions

for all of their interstate, domestic,

interexchange services available to any

member of the public in an easy to

understand format and in a timely

manner, for purposes of enforcing

Section 254(g) of the Communications

Act, as amended.

c. Recordkeeping requirement: In the

Order on Reconsideration, the

Commission affirms its conclusion in

the Second Report and Order to require

nondominant interexchange carriers to

maintain at their premises price and

service information regarding all of their

interstate, domestic, interexchange

service offerings that they can submit to

the Commission upon request. The