62302 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 1997 / Notices

Douglas W. Smith

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–30632 Filed 11–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5926–1]

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Proposed Collection;

Comment Request; ‘‘Clean Water Act

State Revolving Fund Program’’

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

EPA is planning to submit the following

continuing Information Collection

Request (ICR) to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB):

Clean Water Act State Revolving Fund

Program, EPA ICR Number 1391.04,

OMB Control Number 2040–118, and

current expiration date of 02/28/98.

Before submitting the ICR to OMB for

review and approval, EPA is soliciting

comments on specific aspects of the

proposed information collection as

described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before January 20, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Clifford Yee, Office of Wastewater

Management (4204), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Clifford Yee (202) 260–5822; FAX: (202)

260-0116; E-Mail:

yee.clifford@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected entities: Entities potentially

affected by this action are the fifty

States, Puerto Rico, and the recipients of

assistance in each of these jurisdictions.

Title: Clean Water Act State Revolving

Fund Program; OMB Control No. 2040–

0118; EPA ICR No. 1391.04; expiring 02/

28/98.

Abstract: The Clean Water Act, as

amended by ‘‘The Water Quality Act of

1987’’ (U.S.C. 1381–1387 et. Seq.),

created a Title VI which authorizes

grants to States for the establishment of

State Water Pollution Control Revolving

Funds (SRFs). The information activities

are pursuant to Section 606 of the Act,

and SRF Interim Final Rule (March

1990). The 1987 Act declares that water

pollution control revolving loan funds

shall be administered by an

instrumentality of the State subject to

the requirements of the act. This means

that each State has a general

responsibility for administering its

revolving fund, and must take on certain

specific responsibilities in carrying out

its administrative duties. The

information collection activities will

occur primarily at the program level

through the State Intended Use Plan and

Annual Report. The information is

needed annually to implement Section

606 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The

Act requires the information to ensure

national accountability, adequate public

comment and review, fiscal integrity

and consistent management directed to

achieve environmental objectives. The

individual information collections are:

(1) Capitalization Grant Application and

Agreement/ State Intended Use Plan, (2)

Annual Report, (3) State Audit, and (4)

Application for SRF Financial

Assistance.

(1) Capitalization Grant Application

and Agreement / State Intended Use

Plan: The State will prepare a

capitalization grant application that

includes an Intended Use Plan (IUP)

outlining in detail how it will use all the

funds available to the Fund. The grant

agreement contains or incorporates by

reference the IUP, application materials,

payment schedule, and required

assurances. The bulk of the information

is provided in the IUP. The legal

agreement which commits the State and

EPA to execute their responsibilities

under the Act.

(2) Annual Report: The State will

agree to complete and submit an annual

report that indicates how the State has

met the goals and objectives of the

previous fiscal year as stated in the IUP

and grant agreement. The Report

provides information on loan recipients,

loan amounts, loan terms, project

categories, and similar data on other

forms of assistance. The Report

describes the extent to which the

existing SRF financial operating

policies, alone or in combination with

other State financial assistance

programs, will provide for the long term

fiscal health of the Fund and carry out

other provisions specified in the grant

operating agreement.

(3) Annual Audit: Most States have

agreed to conduct or have conducted a

separate financial audit of the

capitalization grant which will provide

opinions on the financial statements,

and a report on the internal controls and

compliance with program requirements.

The remaining States will be covered by

audits conducted under the

requirements of the Single Audit Act

and by EPA’s Office of Inspector

General.

(4) Applications for SRF Financing

Assistance: Local communities and

other eligible entities have to prepare

and submit applications for SRF

assistance to their respective State

Agency which manages the SRF

program. The State reviews the

completed loan applications, and

verifies that the proposed projects will

comply with applicable Federal and

State requirements.

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 are listed

in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter

15.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information,

including the validity of the

methodology and assumptions used;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(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.

BURDEN STATEMENT

(1) Capitalization Grant Application and Agreement/State Intended Use Plan

1998 .................. 51 States×400 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 20,400 Burden Hours.

1999 .................. 51 States×400 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 20,400 Burden Hours.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 1997 / Notices 62303

BURDEN STATEMENT—Continued

2000 .................. 51 States×400 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 20,400 Burden Hours.

(2) Annual Report

1998 .................. 51 States×275 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 14,025 Burden Hours.

1999 .................. 51 States×275 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 14,025 Burden Hours.

2000 .................. 51 States×275 Hours ................................................................................................................. = 14,025 Burden Hours.

(3) State Annual Audit

1998 .................. 51 States×80 Hours ................................................................................................................... = 4,080 Burden Hours.

1999 .................. 51 States×80 Hours ................................................................................................................... = 4,080 Burden Hours.

2000 .................. 51 States×80 Hours ................................................................................................................... = 4,080 Burden Hours.

(4) Applications for SRF Financing Assistance

1998 .................. 51 States×24 Applications×40 Hours ......................................................................................... = 48,960 Hours.

1999 .................. 51 States×29 Applications×40 Hours ......................................................................................... = 59,160 Hours.

2000 .................. 51 States×34 Applications×40 Hours ......................................................................................... = 69,360 Hours.

1998 .................. 1,224 Communities×60 Hours .................................................................................................... = 73,440 Burden Hours.

1999 .................. 1,479 Communities×60 Hours .................................................................................................... = 88,740 Burden Hours.

2000 .................. 1,734 Communities×60 Hours .................................................................................................... = 104,040 Burden Hours.

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; 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.

Dated: November 14, 1997.

Michael B. Cook,

Director, Office of Wastewater Management.

[FR Doc. 97–30657 Filed 11–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5486–4]

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 November 10,

1997 Through November 14, 1997

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 970446, Draft EIS, BLM, MT,

Golden Sunlight Mine Expansion,

Implementation of Amendment 008 to

Operating Permit No. 0065, COE

Section 404 Permit, Whitehall,

Jefferson County MT, Due: January 21,

1998, Contact: David Williams (406)

494–5059.

EIS No. 970447, Final EIS, AFS, SD,

Anchor Hill Mine Expansion Project

in Gilt Edge Mine, Plan-of-Operations,

Approval, Black Hills National Forest,

SD, Due: January 05, 1998, Contact:

Don Murray (605) 578–2744.

EIS No. 970448, Draft EIS, USN, CA,

Miramar Naval Air Station

Realignment of E–2 Aircraft

Squadrons, Three Installations are

consider: Point Muga Naval Air

Weapons Station, Lemoore Navel Air

Station and El Centro, Ventura

Fresno, King and Imperial Counties,

CA, Due: January 05, 1998, Contact:

Ms. Kelly Knight (619) 532–2456.

EIS No. 970449, Final EIS, USN, CA,

Novato, California Department of

Defense Housing Facility Disposal

and Reuse, Implementation, City of

Novato, Marin County, CA, Due:

December 22, 1997, Contact: Gary J.

Munekawa (650) 244–3022.

EIS No. 970450, Draft EIS, USN, HI, Fort

Kamehameha Outfall Replacement for

Wastewater Treatment Plant, Navy

Public Works Center, Pearl Harbor,

HI, Due: January 05, 1998, Contact:

Gary Kasaoke (808) 471–9338.

EIS No. 970451, Draft EIS, DOE, CO,

Rocky Flats Environmental

Technology Site, Management of

Certain Plutonium Residues and

Scrub Alloy Stored for Disposal or

other Disposition, Waste Isolation

Pilot Plant, Golden, CO, Due: January

05, 1998, Contact: Charles Head (202)

586–5151.

Dated: November 18, 1997.

B. Katherine Biggs,

Associate Director, NEPA Compliance

Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–30695 Filed 11–20–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5486–5]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared November 03, 1997 Through

November 07, 1997 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 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

11, 1997 (62 FR 16154).

Final EISs

ERP No. F–COE–E40764–00, Fort

Campbell Rail Connector, Construction

between the Government-Owned Line

Railroad and CSX Line, Hopkinsville

and Clarkville, Christian Co., KY and

Montgomery and Stewart Counties, TN.

Summary: EPA continued to express

concern over the potential impacts of

the preferred alternative, and suggested

that Alternative 3 be selected instead in

order to minimize long-term impacts to

water and air quality.