Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30917

23, 2001, Contact: David J. Dorworth

(202) 514–6470.

EIS No. 010198, Draft EIS, GSA, NY,

U.S. Mission to the United Nations

(USUN), Demolition of Current USUN

and the Construction of New Facility

on the Same Site, Located at 799

United Nations Plaza, New York, NY,

Comment Period Ends: July 23, 2001,

Contact: Peter Sneed (212) 264–3581.

EIS No. 010199, Final EIS, RUS, KY,

Jackson County Lake Project,

Implementation, To Provide Adequate

Water Supplies for the Projected

Residential, Commercial and

Industrial Needs, Funding and

Possible COE Section 10 and 404

Permits, Jackson County, KY, Wait

Period Ends: July 09, 2001, Contact:

Mark S. Plank (202) 720–1649.

EIS No. 010200, Final EIS, IBR, CA,

Grassland Bypass Project (2001 Use

Agreement), To Implement the New

Use Agreement for the period from

October 1, 2001 through December 21,

2009, San Joaquin River and Merced

River, Fresno, Merced and Stanislaus

Counties, CA, Wait Period Ends: July

09, 2001, Contact: Michael Delamore

(559) 487–5039.

EIS No. 010201, Final EIS, AFS, NV, CA,

Northern Sierra Amendment to the

Toiyabe Land and Resource

Management, To Unify and Revise

Management Direction, HumboldtToiyabe National Forest, Carson

Ranger District, Stanislaus National

Forest, Lake Tahoe Basin Management

Unit, Douglas and Washoe Counties,

NV and Alpine and Toulomne

Counties, CA, Wait Period Ends: July

09, 2001, Contact: Dave Loomis (775)

882–2766.

EIS No. 010202, Final Supplement,

COE, KY, Lower Cumberland and

Tennessee Rivers Navigation

Improvements, Kentucky Lock

Addition, Implementation, Nashville

District, Marshall and Livingston

Counties, KY, Wait Period Ends: July

09, 2001, Contact: Tim Higgs (615)

736–7863.

EIS No. 010203, Final EIS, AFS, CA,

Fuels Reduction for Community

Protection Phase 1 Project on the Six

Rivers National Forest, Proposes to

Reduce Fuels High Severity Burned

Stands, Lower Trinity Ranger District,

Humboldt and Trinity Counties, CA,

Wait Period Ends: July 09, 2001,

Contact: David Webb (707) 457–3131.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 010128, Draft EIS, FHW, MT,

Montana State Primary Route 78 (P–

78), Reconstruction, Widening and

Realignment, from the junction with

State Secondary Route 419 (S–419)

which is just South of Abarokee, to

the Southern end of the Yellowstone

River Bridge which is just south of

Columbus, MT, Due: June 25, 2001,

Contact: Dale W. Paulson (406) 449–

5302. Revision of FR Notice Published

on 04/27/2001: CEQ Review Period

Ending 06/11/2001 has been Extended

to 06/25/2001.

EIS No. 010172, Draft EIS, FHW, MD,

MD–210 (Indian Head Highway)

Multi-Modal Study, MD–210

Improvements between I–95/I–495

(Capitol Beltway) and MD–228

Funding and US COE Section 404

Permit Issuance, Prince George’s

County, MD, Due: July 23, 2001,

Contact: Nelson Castellanos (410)

962–4342. Revision of FR notice

published on 05/18/2001: CEQ Due

Date Corrected from 09/23/2001 to 07/

23/2001.

Dated: June 4, 2001.

Joseph C. Montgomery,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities

[FR Doc. 01–14512 Filed 6–7–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6992–6]

Notice to Existing Assistance

Agreement Recipients Funded With

Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 or 2001

Appropriations: New Requirements

Regarding Litigation and Lobbying

Certification

ACTION: Notice.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

SUMMARY: The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) Circulars A–21, A–

87, and A–122, which establish the

principles for determining allowable

costs under Federal assistance

agreements, prohibit the use of Federal

assistance funds for certain lobbying

and litigation costs.

In addition, Section 424 of the

Departments of Veterans Affairs and

Housing and Urban Development, and

Independent Agencies Appropriations

Act, 2001, Public Law 106–277, requires

that: ‘‘A chief executive officer of any

entity receiving funds under this Act

shall certify that none of the funds have

been used to engage in the lobbying of

the Federal Government or in litigation

against the United States unless

authorized under existing law.’’ Section

426 of the Department of Veterans

Affairs and Housing and Urban

Development, and Independent

Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000,

Public Law 106–74, contains a similar

provision. This requirement applies to

not-for-profit institutions, educational

institutions, state, local or tribal

governments and other entities

receiving assistance awards under EPA’s

FY 2000 and 2001 Appropriations Acts.

The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA),

44 U.S.C.A. 3500 et seq., requires that a

Federal agency intending to request

information from ten or more persons

must obtain OMB approval before

requesting that information. The

appropriations act provisions described

above impose additional information

collection requirements on EPA

assistance agreements. Therefore, EPA is

currently seeking OMB approval of an

information collection request for a

certification document to be distributed

and signed by a chief executive officer

representing each entity. The

certification document will not be

disseminated until it has been approved

by OMB.

Even though OMB has not yet

approved the information collection

request for the certification document,

the mandates in the appropriations acts

remain in effect because they are

imposed directly by statute. Thus,

recipients with assistance agreements

funded with FY 2000 or FY 2001

appropriations must comply with this

certification requirement. However, a

particular format is not required until

that form is approved by OMB. Until

that time, each entity may provide this

certification in any reasonable manner

of choice. The certification must be

submitted to EPA after the funds

received under those appropriations

have been expended.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

William Hedling, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Grants and

Debarment, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20460, phone:

(202) 564–5377, FAX: (202) 565–2470,

or e-mail at

www.hedling.william@epa.gov.

Howard F. Corcoran,

Director Office of Grants & Debarment.

[FR Doc. 01–14483 Filed 6–7–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6993–2]

Science Advisory Board; Notification

of Public Advisory Committee

Meetings

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, Public Law 92–463,

notice is hereby given of four meetings

30918 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices

of the Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS) of the US EPA

Science Advisory Board’s (SAB)

Environmental Engineering Committee

(EEC). The meetings are open to the

public, however, seating is limited and

available on a first come basis.

Important Notice: Documents that are

the subject of SAB reviews are normally

available from the originating EPA office

and are not available from the SAB

Office—information concerning

availability of documents from the

relevant Program Office is included

below.

1. Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS)—First

Teleconference Meeting—June 26, 2001

The Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS) will meet by

conference call from noon–2 pm Eastern

time on June 26, 2001. Members of the

public wishing to participate in the

teleconference must make arrangements

with Ms. Mary Winston by noon the

Wednesday before the meeting.

Instructions about how to participate in

the conference call can be obtained by

calling Ms. Mary Winston, Management

Assistant, at (202) 564–4538, or via email at: winston.mary@epa.gov.

The SISS welcomes written public

comment and will accept oral comments

during a portion of this conference call.

The comment period will be limited to

approximately 30 minutes in total with

about five minutes allowed for per

speaker. Additional opportunities for

public comment will provided at the

July 19 and August 27 conference call

meetings as well as the September 17–

19, 2001 face-to-face meeting.

Purpose of the Meeting—The purpose

of the conference call meeting is to

allow the Committee and the Agency to

discuss and refine, if necessary, the

charge for the review of the Surface

Impoundments Study and to make plans

for the face-to-face meeting on

September 17–19, 2001.

Availability of Materials and Contact

Information—See below.

2. Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS)—Teleconference

Meeting—July 19, 2001

The Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS) will meet by

conference call from 1–3 pm Eastern

time on July 19, 2001. Members of the

public wishing to participate in the

teleconference must make arrangements

with Ms. Mary Winston by noon the

Wednesday before the meeting.

Instructions about how to participate in

the conference call can be obtained by

calling Ms. Mary Winston, Management

Assistant, at (202) 564–4538, or via email at: winston.mary@epa.gov.

The SISS welcomes written public

comment and will accept oral comments

during a portion of this conference call.

The comment period will be limited to

approximately 30 minutes in total with

about five minutes allowed for per

speaker. Additional opportunities for

public comment will be provided at the

August 27 conference call meeting as

well as the September 17–19, 2001 faceto-face meeting.

Purpose of the Meeting—The purpose

of the conference call meeting is to

allow the Subcommittee and the Agency

to continue preparations for the face-toface meeting. The chair plans to make

writing assignments to the panelists and

confirm that they have the materials

necessary to complete them.

Availability of Materials and Contact

Information—See below.

3. Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS)—Teleconference

Meeting—August 27, 2001

The Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS) will meet by

conference call from 1–3 pm Eastern

time on August 27, 2001. Members of

the public wishing to participate in the

teleconference must make arrangements

with Ms. Mary Winston by noon the

Wednesday before the meeting.

Instructions about how to participate in

the conference call can be obtained by

calling Ms. Mary Winston, Management

Assistant, at (202) 564–4538, or via email at: winston.mary@epa.gov.

The SISS welcomes written public

comment and will accept oral comments

during a portion of this conference call.

The comment period will be limited to

approximately 30 minutes in total with

about five minutes allowed for per

speaker. Additional opportunities for

public comment will provided at the

September 17–19, 2001 face-to-face

meeting.

Purpose of the Meeting—The purpose

of the conference call meeting is to

allow the Subcommittee and the Agency

to complete preparations for the face-toface meeting. Panelists will discuss their

preliminary, individual writings and

accept comments on them.

Availability of Materials and Contact

Information—See below.

4. Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS)—September 17–

19, 2001

The Surface Impoundments Study

Subcommittee (SISS) will meet Monday

September 17 through Wednesday

September 19, 2001, room 6530 of the

Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The

meeting will convene at 9:30 Eastern

time on Monday September 17 and will

adjourn no later than 3:00 pm

Wednesday September 19, 2001.

Purpose of the Meeting—The

Subcommittee will review the Office of

Solid Waste’s Surface Impoundments

Study and plans to prepare a draft

report of the consensus findings,

conclusions and recommendations

resulting from that review. The

Subcommittee may schedule a

subsequent public conference call

meeting to approve final language of its

draft report before submitting it to the

Environmental Engineering Committee

for consideration. If so, that will be

announced separately.

Background: Under the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA),

EPA allowed land placement of

‘‘decharacterized’’ wastes that were

formerly characteristic hazardous

wastes managed in wastewater systems,

but had been treated or diluted to

remove the characteristic hazard. The

Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act

of 1996 (LDPFA) required that EPA

study the two types of land placement

of these wastes: underground injection,

and placement (storage, treatment or

disposal) in surface impoundments.

This peer review concerns only the

surface impoundment waste

management technique.

The study of surface impoundments is

also the subject of other regulatory and

judicial developments. For certain types

of facilities EPA was required to study

human health risks from air inhalation

of 105 chemical constituents present in

surface impoundments.

Industrial Surface Impoundments in

the United States is the report that

discusses EPA’s estimated risks to

human health and the environment that

may be posed by managing industrial

nonhazardous wastes in surface

impoundments. It provides estimates of

cancer and non-cancer human health

risks for individuals (receptors) who

may be exposed to releases from surface

impoundments used to manage

wastewaters and wastewater treatment

sludges, a screening analysis of other

indirect pathway human health risks,

and a screening analysis of the potential

risks to ecological receptors. EPA will

use the risk results, along with the

analysis of existing regulatory and

nonregulatory programs designed to

address the risks (described in Chapter

4 of the report) to decide whether, and

if so, how, to apply the land disposal

restrictions or take other appropriate

actions to address risks found.

In 1997 a subcommittee of the

Environmental Engineering Committee

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices 30919

Subcommittee reviewed the draft

structure for this study. The

Subcommittee commented on: a) the

technical merits of the overall study

structure; b) the technical merits of the

proposed risk assessment; and c) the

involvement of technical experts,

affected facilities and the public at

critical points in the study’s design and

implementation. This report (EPA–

SAB–EEC–98–009) can be found in the

Fiscal Year 1998 Reports section of the

SAB’s website (www.epa.gov/sab).

Charge to the Committee—The full

charge will be posted at the SAB’s

website (www.epa.gov/sab). In

summary, the Subcommittee is charged

to address the following questions:

(1)(a) Does the Science Advisory

Board believe that the general

methodology we chose for developing

our risk analysis was appropriate for the

policy questions posed in the statute

and consent decree.

(b) Regarding the overall study

implementation, from design through

sample selection, data collection and

analysis, what areas of strength do you

see in the overall methodology, and

what areas of potential improvement or

additional analysis do you recommend?

(c) Did EPA adequately characterize

the risks? Are the risk analysis and

findings transparent? That is, are they

explicit in:

• Describing the assessment approach,

assumptions, extrapolations and use

of models

• Describing plausible alternative

assumptions

• Identifying data gaps

• Distinguishing science from policy

• Describing uncertainty, and

• Describing the relative strength of the

assessment?

(d) Please provide your assessment of

the accuracy of EPA’s overall study

conclusions regarding risks to human

health and the environment. Were the

conclusions either false positive or false

negative conclusions (finding risks of

greater or lesser magnitude than the

risks that likely exist)?

(2)(a) Should EPA have performed a

more in-depth evaluation of abnormal

operating condition events? If so, what

methods or approaches would the SAB

recommend regarding collecting more

reliable data, and modeling the

probability and impacts of such events?

(3)(a) For the indirect human health

and ecological screening-level analyses,

in the SAB’s view, do the results point

to areas of potential future research? If

so, do you have recommendations on

prioritizing future studies in these

areas?

(b) Based on the screening-level

estimates we developed for other

indirect and ecological risks, did it

appear that we overlooked potential

problem areas?

(c) Did we clearly describe and

properly characterize the other indirect

human health and ecological risk

analyses?

(4)(a) Is it likely that EPA’s data

imputation protocol, or ‘‘surrogate data

protocol’’ for imputing waste

composition data markedly affected the

ultimate conclusions regarding potential

risks? If so, in what direction did the

protocol probably bias the conclusions?

(b) Should EPA have used any other

approaches for qualifying or presenting

the data?

(c) Was using the assumption that a

chemical could be present up to the

detection limit, when it was reported as

being present below a detection limit, a

reasonable concentration to choose for

risk screening purposes?

(d) Did the EPA-generated default

detection limit protocol provide

reasonable approximations of likely

detection limits encountered in the field

by the facilities, when the detection

limits were not reported in the

laboratory analysis?

(e) Do the results that are based on

imputed/detection limit data suggest

that further analysis is needed?

(5)(a) Although there are limitations

of performing the comparison of survey

and field sampling waste composition

data, what is the SAB’s view on EPA’s

conclusions about the accuracy of the

reported survey data on chemical

constituent concentrations/quantities?

(b) What is the SAB’s view on EPA’s

conclusion on the potential incomplete

reporting of chemical constituents

present?

(c) Would the SAB recommend

alternate approaches, in order to obtain

the best possible information regarding

the exact chemical constituents present,

given the same budget and time

constraints?

(6)(a) Would the SAB recommend

another approach for representing the

groundwater source term, for example,

performing a bounding analysis, using

the sludge data, where available, to

represent an upper bound of the

groundwater source term, and using

wastewater data as the lower bound, for

those chemical constituents for which

this situation may be an issue?

(b) Compared to other sources of

uncertainty in the groundwater and

groundwater to surface water pathway

analyses, how large a source of

uncertainty does the decision to use

wastewater composition data appear to

introduce into the overall study

conclusions?

Availability of Materials—The

background materials provided to the

Subcommittee are available at http://

www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/ldr/

icr/ldr-impd.htm. A limited number of

paper copies can be obtained by

contacting Shannon Sturgeon, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Solid Waste (5307W), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200

Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Ms. Sturgeon

may also be contacted at 703 605 0509

or via e-mail at

sturgeon.sharon@epa.gov. The draft

meeting agenda may be obtained from

Ms. Mary Winston, Management

Assistant, at (202) 564–4538, or via email at:winston.mary@epa.gov

approximately two weeks before the

meeting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Any member

of the public wishing further

information concerning this meeting or

wishing to submit brief oral comments

(10 minutes or less) must contact Ms.

Kathleen White, Designated Federal

Officer, Science Advisory Board

(1400A), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone

(202) 564–4559; fax (202) 501–0582; or

via e-mail at conway.kathleen@epa.gov.

Requests for oral comments must be in

writing (e-mail, fax or mail) and

received by Ms. White no later than

noon Eastern Standard Time on the

Wednesday before the scheduled

meeting.

Providing Oral or Written Comments at

SAB Meetings

It is the policy of the Science

Advisory Board to accept written public

comments of any length, and to

accommodate oral public comments

whenever possible. The Science

Advisory Board expects that public

statements presented at its meetings will

not be repetitive of previously

submitted oral or written statements.

Oral Comments: In general, each

individual or group requesting an oral

presentation at a face-to-face meeting

will be limited to a total time of ten

minutes. For these teleconference

meetings, opportunities for oral

comment have been expanded to no

more than five minutes per speaker and

no more than thirty minutes total.

Deadlines for getting on the public

speaker list for a meeting are given

above. Speakers should bring at least 35

copies of their comments and

presentation slides for distribution to

the reviewers and public at the meeting.

Written Comments: Although the SAB

accepts written comments until the date

30920 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 111 / Friday, June 8, 2001 / Notices

of the meeting (unless otherwise stated),

written comments should be received in

the SAB Staff Office at least one week

prior to the meeting date so that the

comments may be made available to the

committee for their consideration.

Comments should be supplied to Ms.

White at the address/contact

information noted above in the

following formats: one hard copy with

original signature, and one electronic

copy via e-mail (acceptable file format:

WordPerfect, Word, or Rich Text files

(in IBM-PC/Windows 95/98 format).

Those providing written comments and

who attend the meeting are also asked

to bring 25 copies of their comments for

public distribution.

General Information—Additional

information concerning the Science

Advisory Board, its structure, function,

and composition, may be found on the

SAB Website (http://www.epa.gov/sab)

and in The FY2000 Annual Report of

the Staff Director which is available

from the SAB Publications Staff at (202)

564–4533 or via fax at (202) 501–0256.

Committee rosters, draft Agendas and

meeting calendars are also located on

our website.

Meeting Access—Individuals

requiring special accommodation at this

meeting, including wheelchair access to

the conference room, should contact Ms.

Winston at least five business days prior

to the meeting so that appropriate

arrangements can be made.

Dated: May 31, 2001.

John R. Fowle, III,

Acting Staff Director, Science Advisory Board.

[FR Doc. 01–14475 Filed 6–7–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[OPPTS–59376; FRL–6787–1]

Approval of Test Marketing Exemption

for a Certain New Chemical With

Comment Period

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA’s

approval of an application for test

marketing exemption (TME) under

section 5(h)(1) of the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) and 40 CFR 720.38.

EPA has designated this application as

TME–01–0010. The test marketing

conditions are described in the TME

application and in this notice.

DATES: Approval of this TME is effective

May 31, 2001. Written comments will be

received until June 25, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted by mail, electronically, or in

person. Please follow the detailed

instructions for each method as

provided in Unit III. of the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure

proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative

that you identify docket control number

OPPTS–59376 and the TME number

TME–01–0010 in the subject line on the

first page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information contact: Barbara

Cunningham, Director, Office of

Program Management and Evaluation

(7401), Office of Pollution Prevention

and Toxics, Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20460; telephone

number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address:

TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.

For technical information contact:

Andrea Conrath, New Chemicals

Prenotice Branch, Chemical Control

Division (7405), Office of Pollution

Prevention and Toxics, Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460;

telephone number: (202) 260–2721; email address: conrath.andrea@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action is directed in particular to

the chemical manufacturer and/or

importer who submitted the TME to

EPA. This action may, however, be of

interest to the public in general. Since

other entities may also be interested, the

Agency has not attempted to describe all

the specific entities that may be affected

by this action. If you have any questions

regarding the applicability of this action

to a particular entity, consult the

technical person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

II. How Can I Get Additional

Information, Including Copies of this

Document or Other Related Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain

electronic copies of this document, and

certain other related documents that

might be available electronically, from

the EPA Internet Home Page at http://

www.epa.gov/. To access this

document, on the Home Page select

‘‘Laws and Regulations,’’ ‘‘Regulations

and Proposed Rules,’’ and then look up

the entry for this document under the

‘‘Federal Register— Environmental

Documents.’’ You can also go directly to

the Federal Register listings at http://

www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

2. In person. The Agency has

established an official record for this

action under docket control number

OPPTS–59376. The official record

consists of the documents specifically

referenced in this action, any public

comments received during an applicable

comment period, and other information

related to this action, including any

information claimed as confidential

business information (CBI). This official

record includes the documents that are

physically located in the docket, as well

as the documents that are referenced in

those documents. The public version of

the official record does not include any

information claimed as CBI. The public

version of the official record, which

includes printed, paper versions of any

electronic comments submitted during

an applicable comment period, is

available for inspection in the TSCA

Nonconfidential Information Center,

North East Mall Rm. B–607, Waterside

Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC.

The Center is open from noon to 4 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The telephone number of the

Center is (202) 260–7099.

III. How and to Whom Do I Submit

Comments?

The notice of receipt was published

late in the 45–day review period;

however, an opportunity to submit

comments is being offered at this time.

You may submit comments through the

mail, in person, or electronically. To

ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is

imperative that you identify docket

control number OPPTS–59376 in the

subject line on the first page of your

response. The complete nonconfidential

document is available in the TSCA

Nonconfidential Information Center at

the address in Unit II.B. between noon

and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays. EPA may modify or

revoke the test marketing exemption if

comments are received which cast

significant doubt on its finding that the

test marketing activities will not present

an unreasonable risk of injury.

1. By mail. Submit your comments to:

Document Control Office (7407), Office

of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

(OPPT), Environmental Protection

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

2. In person or by courier. Deliver

your comments to: OPPT Document

Control Office (DCO) in East Tower Rm.

G–099, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC. The DCO is open from

8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The

telephone number for the DCO is (202)

260–7093.

3. Electronically. You may submit

your comments electronically by e-mail

to: oppt.ncic@epa.gov or mail your

computer disk to the address identified

above. Do not submit any information