74 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 1 / Friday, January 2, 1998 / Notices

determining the appropriate action to be

taken, but will not serve to make

protestants parties to the proceeding.

Any person wishing to become a party

must file a motion to intervene. Copies

of this filing are on file with the

Commission and are available for public

inspection.

Lois D. Cashell,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–34172 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5458–7]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared December 15, 1997 Through

December 19, 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 the

Federal Register dated April 11, 1997

(62 FR 16154).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–BLM–K67046–NV, Rating

EC2, 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.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns that cyanide

heap leach operations and overburden

piles could adversely impact surface or

groundwater, and recommended

specific design modifications and

mitigation.

ERP No. D–IBR–K64016–CA, Rating

LO1, Hamilton City Pumping Plant, Fish

Screen Improvement Project, COE

Section 10 and 404 Permits, Central

Valley, Butte, Colusa, Glenn and

Tehama Counties, CA.

Summary: Because of the clear

beneficial effects to endangered species.

EPA concurred with the proposed

project and strongly supported the

Environmental Compliance and

Mitigation Monitoring and Fish

Protection and Evaluation and

Monitoring Programs. EPA

recommended that FEIS include a table

which prioritizes action items if

adequate resources are not received.

Final EISs

ERP No. F–BLM–K65196–CA,

Interlakes Special Recreation

Management Area Plan,

Implementation, Federal and Private

Lands Issues, Shasta County, CA.

Summary: EPA’s concerns were

adequately addressed in the final EIS.

However, EPA recommended that the

Record of Decision include the

management plan implementation

strategy.

ERP No. F–BLM–K67042–CA, Castle

Mountain Mine Open Pit Heap Leach

Gold Mine Expansion Project, Plan of

Operations Modification and Mine and

Reclamation Plans Amendment,

Approvals, San Bernardino County, CA.

Summary: The Final EIS addressed

most of EPA’s concerns. EPA

recommended that the Record of

Decision include post-mining

monitoring of pit conditions for public

and environmental safety.

ERP No. F–FAA–K51036–HI, Kahului

Airport Master Plan Improvements,

Implementation, Funding and Approval

of Permits, Kahului, Maui County, HI.

Summary:

Review of the Final EIS was not deemed

necessary. No formal comment letter

was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. F–FHW–K40205–CA, US 101

Realignment Construction, near Cushing

Creek from Mile Post 20.3 to 22.3 South

of Crescent City, Funding and COE

Permits, Del Norte County, CA.

Summary: Review of the Final EIS

was not deemed necessary. No formal

comment letter was sent the preparing

agency.

ERP No. F–NPS–K61137–AZ, Organ

Pipe Cactus National Monument

General Management Plan and

Development Concept Plan

Implementation, Portion of the Sonoran

Desert, Pima County, AZ.

Summary: Review of the final EIS was

not deemed necessary. No formal

comment letter was sent to the

preparing agency.

ERP No. FS–COE–C36030–NJ, Green

Brook Sub-Basin Flood Control Plan,

Updated Information concerning a

Revised Recommended Plan and

Mitigation Plan, Implementation,

Middlesex, Union and Somerset

Counties, NJ.

Summary: EPA recommended that the

Record of Decision recognized that the

Cornell-Dubilies Electronices site has

been proposed for listing on the

National Priorities List given potential

PCB contamination in Bound Brook and

New Market Pond. In addition, EPA

recommended additional measures to

minimize impacts to wetlands.

Dated: December 30, 1997.

Cliff Rader,

Environmental Protection Specialist, NEPA

Compliance Division, Office of Federal

Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–34226 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5487–6]

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 December 22, 1997 Through

December 26, 1997

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 970491, Draft EIS, NPS, CA, NV,

NM, P140, Coaxial Cable Removal

Project, Plan Approval and Permits

Issuance, Socorro, New Mexico to

Mojave, California, NM, CA and NV,

Due: March 27, 1998, Contact: Joan

DeGraff (303) 969–2464. The above

DEIS was received on 12–19–97. Due

to the Holiday Schedule, EISs

received on 12–19–97 are appearing

in the 1–02–98 Federal Register with

Review and Wait Periods calculated

from the 12–24–97 Federal Register

date.

EIS No. 970492, Final EIS, FHW, NC,

Fayetteville Outer Loop Project, US

401 to I–95 at the existing US 13

Interchange, Funding and US COE

Section 10 and 404 Permit Issuance,

City of Fayetteville, Cumberland

County, NC, Due: January 22, 1998,

Contact: Nicholas L. Graf (919) 856–

4346.

The above FEIS was received on 12–

19–97.

Due to the Holiday Schedule, EISs

received on 12–19–97 are appearing in

the 1–2–98 Federal Register with

Review and Wait Periods calculated

from the 12–24–97 Federal Register

date.

EIS No. 970493, Draft EIS, AFS, CA,

Payen, Pass Creek and English Range

Allotments, Grazing Land

Management Plan, Implementation,

Tahoe National Forest, Sierraville

Ranger District, Sierra and Nevada

Counties, CA, Due: February 17, 1998,

Contact: Jerry Sirski (916) 994–3401.

EIS No. 970494, Draft EIS, AFS, WA,

White Pass Ski Area Expansion,

Special-Use-Permit, Pigtail Basin and
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 1 / Friday, January 2, 1998 / Notices 75

Hogback Basin, Wenatchee and

Gifford, Pinchot National Forests,

Yakima and Lewis Counties, WA,

Due: February 17, 1998, Contact: Jim

Pena (509) 653–2205.

EIS No. 970495, Final EIS, FAA, MO,

Lambert-St. Louis International

Airport (Lambert) Improvements,

Construction and Operation, Airport

Layout Plan Approval, City of St.

Louis, St. Louis County, MO, Due:

February 02, 1998, Contact: Ms. Moira

Keane (816) 426–4731.

EIS No. 970496, Draft EIS, FRC, ND, IA,

MN, IL, lliance Natural Gas Pipeline

Project, Construction and Operation,

Funding, NPDES Permit, COE Section

10 and 404 Permit, ND, MN, IA and

IL, Due: February 17, 1998, Contact:

Paul McKee (202) 208–1088.

EIS No. 970497, Final EIS, URC, UT,

Provo River Restoration Project

(PRRP), Riverine Habitat Restoration,

Reconstruction and Realignment of

the existing Provo River Channel and

Floodplain System between Jordanell

Dam and Deer River Reservoir,

Wasatch County, UT, Due: February

26, 1998, Contact: Mark A. Holden

(801) 524–3146. The US Department

of the Interior is a Joint Lead Agency

for the above Project along with the

Utah Reclamation Mitigation and

Conservation Commission (URC).

Dated: December 30, 1998.

Cliff Rader,

Environmental Protection Specialist, NEPA

Compliance Division, Office of Federal

Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–34227 Filed 12–31–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–5945–3]

Integrated Risk Information System

(IRIS); Announcement of 1998

Program; Request for Information

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice; Announcement of IRIS

1998 Program and request for scientific

information on chronic health effects of

chemical substances.

SUMMARY: The Integrated Risk

Information System (IRIS) is a data base

of the United States Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) that contains

EPA scientific consensus positions on

potential human health effects from

environmental contaminants. On April

2, 1996 EPA announced the IRIS Pilot

Program and solicited scientific

information from the public for

consideration in assessing the chronic

health effects of eleven chemical

substances. (See FR Vol. 61 No. 64 p.

14570.) The Pilot program is near

completion, and the Agency is

preparing a new set of chemical health

assessments for IRIS. The purpose of

this notice is to communicate to the

public the Agency’s plans, and solicit

scientific data and evaluations for

consideration in EPA’s new

assessments.

DATES: Please submit information in

response to this notice by March 3,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Please send relevant

scientific information to the IRIS

Submission Desk in accordance with the

instructions provided under

‘‘Submission of Information’’ in this

notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information on the IRIS program,

contact Amy Mills, National Center for

Environmental Assessment (mail code

8623), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M St. SW, Washington, DC

20460, or call (202) 260–0569, or send

electronic mail inquiries to

mills.amy@epamail.epa.gov. For general

questions about access to IRIS, the

content of IRIS, or how to submit

information in response to this notice,

please call the Risk Information Hotline

at (513) 569–7254. For scientific issues

contact Terry Harvey, National Center

for Environmental Assessment, 26

Martin Luther King Drive, Cincinnati,

OH 45268, or call (513) 569–7531, or

send electronic mail inquiries to

harvey.terry@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Integrated Risk Information

System (IRIS) is an EPA data base

containing Agency consensus scientific

positions on potential adverse human

health effects that may result from

chronic (or lifetime) exposure to

environmental contaminants. IRIS

currently provides health effects

information on over 500 specific

chemical substances.

IRIS contains chemical-specific

summaries of qualitative and

quantitative health information in

support of the first two steps of the risk

assessment process, i.e., hazard

identification and dose-response

evaluation. IRIS information includes

the reference dose for non-cancer health

effects resulting from oral exposure, the

reference concentration for non-cancer

health effects resulting from inhalation

exposure, and the carcinogen

assessment for both oral and inhalation

exposure. Combined with specific

situational exposure assessment

information, the summary health hazard

information in IRIS may be used as a

source in evaluating potential public

health risks from environmental

contaminants.

The Pilot Program

As a consequence of analyzing the

IRIS program and considering

suggestions received about IRIS through

1995, the Agency tested some

improvements through a Pilot Program.

The Pilot focused on improving the

scientific consensus and review process

that precedes IRIS data base entries.

EPA developed (or updated, for existing

entries) non-cancer and cancer

information for eleven Pilot substances.

The Pilot process consisted of, (1) a call

for technical information on the eleven

substances from the public via a FR

Notice, April 2, 1996, (2) a search of the

current literature, (3) development of

health assessments and draft IRIS

summaries, (3) internal peer review (i.e.,

within EPA), (4) external peer review

(i.e., outside EPA), (5) Agency

consensus review and management

approval within EPA, (6) preparation of

final IRIS summaries and supporting

documents, and (7) entry of summaries

into the IRIS data base. The last stage is

currently underway for most of the Pilot

substances.

EPA’s evaluation of the Pilot provided

the basis for designing the operation of

the future IRIS program. For example,

the Agency standardized (1) the

solicitation of scientific information

from the public via a FR notice, (2) the

use of the ‘‘Toxicological Review’’ as a

preferred support document for IRIS

entries which combines cancer and

noncancer assessments, and (3) the use

of rigorous external peer review

procedures for IRIS summaries and

Toxicological Reviews. The final

Agency consensus review process,

while still being tested, is replacing the

former ‘‘CRAVE’’ and ‘‘RfD/RfC Work

Groups’’.

The following substances were

reviewed under the Pilot Program:

Name CAS. No.

Arsenic ...................................... 7440–38–2

Bentazon ................................... 25057–89–0

Beryllium ................................... 7440–41–7

Chlordane ................................. 12789–03–6

Chromium:

Cr (III) .................................... 16065–83–1

Cr (VI) .................................... 18540–29–9

Total Cr ................................. 7440–47–3

Cumene .................................... 98–82–8

Methyl methacrylate .................. 80–62–6

Diphenylmethane diisocyanate 101–68–8

Naphthalene .............................. 91–20–3

Tributyltin oxide ......................... 56–35–9