22550 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices

reports of their activities under the

program.

The information is collected for

compliance purposes by the Engine

Programs Group, Certification and

Compliance Division, Office of

Transportation and Air Quality, Office

of Air and Radiation. Confidentiality of

proprietary information is granted in

accordance with the Freedom of

Information Act, EPA regulations at 40

CFR part 2, and class determinations

issued by EPA’s Office of General

Counsel.

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 Federal Register document

required under 5 CFR 1320.8(d),

soliciting comments on this collection

of information was published on

December 29, 2000, (65 FR 83004). No

comments were received.

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and recordkeeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 146 hours per

equipment manufacturer or postmanufacture marinizer, and 72 hours

per engine manufacturer. 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.

Respondents/Affected Entities:

Nonroad compression ignition engine

and equipment manufacturers and postmanufacture marinizers.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

548.

Frequency of Response: Equipment

manufacturers and post-manufacture

marinizers: On occasion. Engine

manufacturers: Annually.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

66,647 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Capital,

O&M Cost Burden: $18,611.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the addresses listed above.

Please refer to EPA ICR No.1826.02 and

OMB Control No. 2060–0369 in any

correspondence.

Dated: April 25, 2001.

Oscar Morales,

Director, Collection Strategies Division.

[FR Doc. 01–11282 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6975–4]

Adequacy Status of Indiana and

Kentucky Ozone Attainment

Demonstration for Transportation

Conformity Purposes for the Louisville

Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of inadequacy.

SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is

notifying the public that it has found

that the Louisville ozone attainment

demonstration state implementation

plans (SIP) submitted by Kentucky and

Indiana on November 12, 1999, and

November 15, 1999, respectively, do not

contain motor vehicle emission budgets

(MVEBs) that are adequate for

transportation conformity purposes. The

Louisville moderate one-hour ozone

nonattainment area includes Clark and

Floyd Counties, Indiana, and Jefferson

County, Kentucky, and portions of

Bullitt and Oldham Counties in

Kentucky. EPA is finding the MVEBs

inadequate because, due to a decision

by the United States Court of Appeals,

one of the significant assumptions of the

demonstration has changed. The SIP

submittal assumes that regional oxides

of nitrogen ( NOX) reductions will be

achieved in adjoining States by May 1,

2003. Due to the Court’s decision, those

reductions will not be assured to occur

until May 31, 2004. Since the MVEBs in

the SIP submittal could only be

adequate if the reductions occur in

2003, they are now being found

inadequate. Since the November 15,

1999, submittal does not contain

adequate MVEBs, this attainment

demonstration submittal cannot be used

for future transportation conformity

determinations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ryan Bahr, Environmental Engineer,

Regulation Development Section (AR–

18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and

Radiation Division, United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4366,

bahr.ryan@epa.gov.

Dr. Robert Goodwin, Environmental

Scientist, Regulatory Planning Section,

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides,

and Toxics Management Division,

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth St., SW.,

Atlanta, GA 30303, (404) 562–9044,

goodwin.robert@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Today’s notice is simply an

announcement of a finding that EPA has

already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter

to the Indiana Department of

Environmental Management on April

20, 2001, stating that the submitted

Louisville ozone attainment

demonstration does not contain

adequate MVEBs, and EPA Region 4

sent a similar letter to the Kentucky

Division for Air Quality on April 20,

2001. This finding will also be

announced on EPA’s conformity

website: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/traq.

(Once at EPA’s Transportation and Air

Quality Center website, click on the

‘‘Conformity’’ button and look for

‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions

for Conformity.’’)

Transportation conformity is required

by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act.

EPA’s conformity rule requires that

transportation plans, programs, and

projects conform to state air quality

implementation plans and establishes

the criteria and procedures for

determining whether or not they do.

Transportation conformity to a SIP

means that transportation activities will

not produce new air quality violations,

worsen existing violations, or delay

timely attainment of the national

ambient air quality standards.

The criteria by which EPA determines

whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for

conformity purposes are outlined in 40

CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please note that an

adequacy review is separate from EPA’s

completeness review, and it also should

not be used to prejudge EPA’s ultimate

approval of the SIP. Even if EPA finds

a motor vehicle emission budget

adequate, the EPA may later disapprove

the SIP.

EPA described the process for

determining the adequacy of submitted

SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999,

memorandum titled ‘‘Conformity

Guidance on Implementation of March

2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision’’).

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2001 / Notices 22551

EPA followed this guidance in making

this determination.

EPA is finding the MVEBs in the

submitted Louisville attainment SIP

inadequate because the associated SIP

assumes that regional NOX reductions

under the NOX SIP Call will be achieved

in adjoining States by May 1, 2003.

However, on August 30, 2000, the

United States Court of Appeals for the

D.C. Circuit issued an order extending

the compliance date for the NOX SIP

Call from May 1, 2003, to May 31, 2004.

The effect of this ruling is that the

regional NOX emissions reductions

cannot be assumed to occur until 2004,

and, therefore, 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv)

cannot be satisfied by the submitted

MVEBs.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: April 26, 2001.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

Dated: April 20, 2001.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 01–11410 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6975–7]

National Drinking Water Advisory

Council, Arsenic Cost Working Group,

Request for Nominations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice; request for nominations

to the Arsenic Cost Working Group of

the National Drinking Water Advisory

Council.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing

the formation of an Arsenic Cost

Working Group of the National Drinking

Water Advisory Council and soliciting

nominations to this working group. The

Advisory Council was established to

provide practical and independent

advice, consultation, and

recommendations to the Agency on the

activities, functions, and policies related

to the implementation of the Safe

Drinking Water Act as amended.

Any interested person or organization

may nominate qualified individuals for

membership on the working group.

Nominees should be identified by name,

occupation, position, address and

telephone number. To be considered, all

nominations must include a current

resume providing the nominee’s

background, experience and

qualifications.

Following the January 22, 2001

Federal Register promulgation of the

arsenic rule, a number of concerns were

raised to EPA by States, public water

systems, and other stakeholders

regarding the adequacy of science and

the basis for national cost estimates

underlying the rule. Because of the

importance of the arsenic rule and the

national debate surrounding it related to

science and costs, EPA’s Administrator

publicly announced on March 20, 2001,

that the Agency would take additional

steps to reassess the scientific and cost

issues associated with this rule and seek

further public input on each of these

important issues.

Consistent with that commitment,

EPA will work with the National

Drinking Water Advisory Council

(NDWAC) to convene a panel of

nationally recognized technical experts

to review the cost of compliance

estimates associated with the final

arsenic in drinking water rule.

The criteria for selecting working

group members and for conducting the

review are that working group members

are recognized experts in their fields;

that working group members are as

impartial and objective as possible; that

working group members represent an

array of backgrounds and perspectives

(within their disciplines); that the

working group members are available to

participate fully in the review, which

will be conducted over a relatively short

time frame (i.e., within approximately

3–4 months); and that the results of the

review be made publicly available for

comment. Working group members will

be asked to attend a series of meetings

(approximately three) over the course of

3–4 months, participate in the

discussion of key issues and

assumptions at these meetings, and

review and finalize the products and

outputs of the working group. The

working group will make a

recommendation to the full NDWAC.

The NDWAC will, in turn, make a

recommendation to EPA.

Nominations should be submitted to

Janet Pawlukiewicz, Designated Federal

Officer, National Drinking Water

Advisory Council, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Ground

Water and Drinking Water (4601), 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington,

D.C. 20460, no later than May 14, 2001.

The Agency will not formally

acknowledge or respond to

nominations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janet Pawlukiewicz at

pawlukiewicz.janet@epa.gov or call

(202) 260–9194.

Dated: May 2, 2001.

Cynthia C. Dougherty,

Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking

Water.

[FR Doc. 01–11423 Filed 5–3–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–6617–7]

Environmental Impact Statements;

Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal

Activities, General Information (202)

564–7167 or www.epa.gov/oeca/ofa.

Weekly Receipt of Environmental

Impact Statements

Filed April 23, 2001 Through April 27,

2001

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9

EIS No. 010136, Draft EIS, AFS, CO,

Forest Development Trail (FDT) 1135

(Arapaho Ridge Trail), Forest

Development Road (FDR) 711.1 and

FDR 711.1A Motorized or NonMotorized Determination and

Trailhead Parking Areas Creation at

both ends of the Trail, Routt National

Forest, Jackson County, CO, Comment

Period Ends: June 18, 2001, Contact:

Charles T. Oliver (970) 723–8204.

EIS No. 010137, Draft EIS, AFS, ID,

Meadow Face Stewardship Pilot

Project, Implementation, Nez Perce

National Forest, Clearwater Ranger

District, Idaho County, ID, Comment

Period Ends: June 18, 2001, Contact:

Darcy Pederson (208) 983–1950.

EIS No. 010138, Final EIS, FHW, VA,

VA–37 Highway Transportation

Improvement, Construction from VA–

37/I–81/US–11 (south) to VA–37/US–

11 (north), Funding and COE Section

404 Permit, City of Winchester,

Frederick County, VA, Wait Period

Ends: June 04, 2001, Contact: Roberto

Fonseca-Martinez (804) 775–3320.

EIS No. 010139, Final EIS, FHW, TX,

TX–130 Construction, I–35 of

Georgetown to I–10 near Seguin,

Funding, COE Section 404 Permit,

Williamson, Travis, Caldwell,

Guadalupe Counties, TX, Wait Period

Ends: June 04, 2001, Contact: Patrick

Bauer (512) 536–5950.

EIS No. 010140, Final EIS, FRA, FL, GA,

MD, PA, CA, LA, NV, Programmatic—

Maglev Deployment Program,

Development and Construction of an

Operating Public Transportation

System using Magnetic Levitation,

Grants Issuance, CA, FL, GA, LA, MD,

NV and PA, Wait Period Ends: June