17860 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 73 / Friday, April 17, 2009 / Notices 

Camping to Areas, Duchesne, Daggett, 

Uintah Counties, Utah and 

Sweetwater County, Wyoming, 

Comment Period Ends: 06/01/2009, 

Contact: Lesley Tullis, 435–781–5137. 

EIS No. 20090114, Third Final 

Supplement, COE, CA, Port of Los 

Angeles Channel Deepening Project, 

To Dispose of Approximately 3.0 

Million Cubic Yards of Dredge 

Material Required to Complete the 

Channel Deepening Project and to 

Beneficially Reuse the Dredge 

Material with the Port of Los Angeles, 

Los Angeles County, CA, Wait Period 

Ends: 05/18/2009, Contact: Joy 

Jaiswal, 213–452–3851. 

EIS No. 20090115, Draft EIS, SFW, 00, 

Western Snowy Plover Habitat 

Conservation Plan, Proposed Issuance 

of an Incidental Take Permit, Oregon 

Parks and Recreation Department, 

Oregon Coast, OR, CA, WAS, 

Comment Period Ends: 06/16/2009, 

Contact: Laura Todd, 541–867–4558. 

EIS No. 20090116, Final EIS, AFS, WY, 

Spruce Gulch Bark Beetle and Fuels 

Reduction Project, Proposes to 

Implement Bark Beetle Related 

Salvage and SuppressionVegetative 

Treatments and Hazardous Fuels 

Abatement Treatments, Laramie 

Ranger District, Medicine Bow-Routt 

National Forests, Albany and Carbon 

Counties, WY, Wait Period Ends: 05/ 

18/2009, Contact: Melissa Martin, 

307–745–2371. 

Amended Notices 

EIS No. 20090100, Draft EIS, BLM, UT, 

Withdrawn—Mona to Oquirrh 

Transmission Corridor Project, 

Construction, Operation, Maintenance 

and Decommissioning a DoubleCircuit 500/345 Kilovolt (Kv) 

Transmission Line, Right-of-Way 

Grant, Rocky Mountain Power, Juab, 

Salt Lake, Tooele and Utah Counties, 

UT, Comment Period Ends: 07/08/ 

2009, Contact: Megan Crandall, 801– 

539–4061. 

Revision to FR Notice Published 04/ 

10/2009: Officially Withdrawn by the 

Preparing Agency. 

EIS No. 20090104, Draft EIS, BIA, NY, 

Withdrawn—Cayuga Indian Nation of 

New York Conveyance of Land into 

Trust Project, Approval of a 125+ 

Acre Fee-to-Trust Property Transfer of 

Seven Separate Parcel located in the 

Village of Union Springs and Town of 

Springport and Montequma in Cayuga 

County and the Town of Seneca Falls 

in Seneca County, NY, Comment 

Period Ends: 05/26/2009, Contact: 

Kurt G. Chandler, 615–564–6832. 

Revision to FR Notice Published 04/ 

10/2009: Officially Withdrawn by the 

Preparing Agency. 

Dated: April 14, 2009. 

Ken Mittelholtz, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, NEPA 

Compliance Division, Office of Federal 

Activities. 

[FR Doc. E9–8857 Filed 4–16–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

ER–FRL–8592–5] 

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 

to the Office of Federal Activities at 

202–564–7146. 

Summary of Rating Definitions 

Environmental Impact of the Action 

LO—Lack of Objections 

The EPA review has not identified 

any potential environmental impacts 

requiring substantive changes to the 

proposal. The review may have 

disclosed opportunities for application 

of mitigation measures that could be 

accomplished with no more than minor 

changes to the proposal. 

EC—Environmental Concerns 

The EPA review has identified 

environmental impacts that should be 

avoided in order to fully protect the 

environment. Corrective measures may 

require changes to the preferred 

alternative or application of mitigation 

measures that can reduce the 

environmental impact. EPA would like 

to work with the lead agency to reduce 

these impacts. 

EO—Environmental Objections 

The EPA review has identified 

significant environmental impacts that 

must be avoided in order to provide 

adequate protection for the 

environment. Corrective measures may 

require substantial changes to the 

preferred alternative or consideration of 

some other project alternative 

(including the no action alternative or a 

new alternative). EPA intends to work 

with the lead agency to reduce these 

impacts. 

EU—Environmentally Unsatisfactory 

The EPA review has identified 

adverse environmental impacts that is of 

sufficient magnitude that they are 

unsatisfactory from the standpoint of 

public health or welfare or 

environmental quality. EPA intends to 

work with the lead agency to reduce 

these impacts. If the potentially 

unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected 

at the final EIS stage, this proposal will 

be recommended for referral to the CEQ. 

Adequacy of the Impact Statement 

Category 1—Adequate 

EPA believes the draft EIS adequately 

sets forth the environmental impact(s) of 

the preferred alternative and those of 

the alternatives reasonably available to 

the project or action. No further analysis 

or data collection is necessary, but the 

reviewer may suggest the addition of 

clarifying language or information. 

Category 2—Insufficient Information 

The draft EIS does not contain 

sufficient information for EPA to fully 

assess environmental impacts that 

should be avoided in order to fully 

protect the environment, or the EPA 

reviewer has identified new reasonably 

available alternatives that is within the 

spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the 

draft EIS, which could reduce the 

environmental impacts of the action. 

The identified additional information, 

data, analyses, or discussion should be 

included in the final EIS. 

Category 3—Inadequate 

EPA does not believe that the draft 

EIS adequately assesses potentially 

significant environmental impacts of the 

action, or the EPA reviewer has 

identified new, reasonably available 

alternatives that is outside of the 

spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the 

draft EIS, which should be analyzed in 

order to reduce the potentially 

significant environmental impacts. EPA 

believes that the identified additional 

information, data, analyses, or 

discussions are of such a magnitude that 

they should have full public review at 

a draft stage. EPA does not believe that 

the draft EIS is adequate for the 

purposes of the NEPA and/or Section 

309 review, and thus should be formally 

revised and made available for public 

comment in a supplemental or revised 

draft EIS. On the basis of the potential 

significant impacts involved, this 

proposal could be a candidate for 

referral to the CEQ. 

Draft EISs 

EIS No. 20080523, ERP No. D–BLM– 

J03022–00, UNEV Pipeline Project, 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 73 / Friday, April 17, 2009 / Notices 17861 

Construction of a 399-mile Long Main 

Petroleum Products Pipeline, Salt 

Lake, Tooele, Juab, Millard, Iron, and 

Washington Counties, UT and Lincoln 

and Clark Counties, NV. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about potential 

adverse impacts to human health and 

the environment from arsenic and lead 

contaminated soils, and to wetlands and 

aquatic resources. In addition, the final 

EIS should better characterize the 

existing air quality conditions, update 

criteria used in determining air quality 

impact projections, and include 

information on visibility. Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20080537, ERP No. D–BLM– 

K65352–NV, Ely Energy Center, 

Construction and Operation 1500 MW 

Coal-Fired Power Plant and 

Associated Features, White Pine, 

Lincoln, Clark, Nye, Elko and Nevada 

Counties, NV. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about aquatic 

resource, endangered species, and 

construction emission impacts. Rating 

EC2. 

EIS No. 20090017, ERP No. D–USN– 

K11022–GU, Mariana Islands Range 

Complex (MIRC), To Address Ongoing 

and Proposed Military Training 

Activities, Mariana Islands, GU. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about impacts 

to coral reef ecosystems, water quality, 

and the threatened green sea turtle. 

Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090035, ERP No. D–AFS– 

K65357–CA, Tehachapi Renewable 

Transmission Project, Construct, 

Operate and Maintain Ne and 

Upgraded 500 kV and 220kV 

Transmission Lines and Substations, 

Special Use Authorization, Angeles 

National Forest, Los Angeles County, 

CA. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about the 

potential adverse impacts to aquatic and 

biological resources. Analysis of 

potential health impacts from lead and 

arsenic from construction on an NPL 

smelter site and mitigation measures 

should be addressed in the final EIS. 

Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090039, ERP No. D–AFS– 

J65531–SD, Telegraph Project Area, 

Proposes to Implement Multiple 

Resource Management Actions, 

Northern Hills Ranger District, Black 

Hills National Forest, Lawrence and 

Pennington Counties, SD. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about the water 

quality and wildlife habitat impacts 

associated with significant new road 

construction activities. Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090043, ERP No. DR–AFS– 

K65342–CA, Moonlight and Wheeler 

Fires Recovery and Restoration 

Project, Analysis of the No-Action and 

Action Alternatives, Mt. Hough 

Ranger District, Plumas National 

Forest, Plumas County, CA. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about potential 

adverse impacts to water quality and 

wildlife habitat. EPA recommends that 

the Forest Service consider 

incorporating elements of other 

proposed alternatives into the preferred 

alternative, to minimize adverse impacts 

to damaged watersheds. Rating EC2. 

Final EISs 

EIS No. 20090050, ERP No. F–NIG– 

K60038–CA, Graton Rancheria Casino 

and Hotel Project, Transfer of Land 

into Trust, Implementation, Federated 

Indians of Graton Rancheria (Tribe), 

Sonoma County, CA. 

Summary: EPA continue to have 

environmental concerns about impacts 

to groundwater resources. 

Dated: April 14, 2009. 

Ken Mittelholtz, 

Environmental Protection Specialist, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. E9–8862 Filed 4–16–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2008–0470; FRL–8409–2] 

Pesticide Product Registration 

Approval 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces 

Agency approval of an application to 

register the pesticide products 

NEU1173H Concentrate, and NEU1173H 

RTU containing an active ingredient not 

included in any previously registered 

products pursuant to the provisions of 

section 3(c)(5) of the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

(FIFRA), as amended. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Driss Benmhend, Biopesticides and 

Pollution Prevention Division (7511P), 

Office of Pesticide Programs, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001; telephone number: 

(703) 308–9525; e-mail address: 

benmhend.driss@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be potentially affected by 

this action if you are an agricultural 

producer, food manufacturer, or 

pesticide manufacturer. Potentially 

affected entities may include, but are 

not limited to: 

• Crop production (NAICS code 

111). 

• Animal production (NAICS code 

112). 

• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 

311). 

• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 

code 32532). 

This listing is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. Other types of 

entities not listed in this unit could also 

be affected. The North American 

Industrial Classification System 

(NAICS) codes have been provided to 

assist you and others in determining 

whether this action might apply to 

certain entities. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity, consult 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this 

Document and Other Related 

Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established a 

docket for this action under docket 

identification (ID) number EPA–HQ– 

OPP–2008–0470. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either in 

the electronic docket at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, or, if only 

available in hard copy, at the Office of 

Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory 

Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One 

Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. 

Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of 

operation of this Docket Facility are 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Docket Facility telephone 

number is (703) 305–5805. 

In accordance with section 3(c)(2) of 

FIFRA, a copy of the approved label, the 

list of data references, the data and other 

scientific information used to support 

registration, except for material 

specifically protected by section 10 of 

FIFRA, are also available for public 

inspection. Requests for data must be 

made in accordance with the provisions 

of the Freedom of Information Act and 

must be addressed to the Freedom of 

Information Office (A–101), 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460–0001. Such requests should: 

Identify the product name and 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES