Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 231 / Friday, December 2, 2005 / Notices 72299 

Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal 

Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20585 between 9 

a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday, except 

Federal holidays. Minutes will also be 

available at the Department of Energy’s 

Environmental Information Center and 

Reading Room at 115 Memorial Drive, 

Barkley Centre, Paducah, Kentucky 

between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., on Monday 

through Friday or by writing to David 

Dollins, Department of Energy, Paducah 

Site Office, Post Office Box 1410, MS–

103, Paducah, Kentucky 42001 or by 

calling him at (270) 441–6819. 

Issued at Washington, DC, on November 

23, 2005. 

Carol Matthews, 

Acting Advisory Committee Management 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. E5–6763 Filed 12–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6669–9] 

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 

202–564–7167. An explanation of the 

ratings assigned to draft environmental 

impact statements (EISs) was published 

in FR dated April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815). 

Draft EISs 

EIS No. 20050325, ERP No. D–AFS–

D65032–WV, Programmatic—

Monongahela National Forest Plan 

Revision, Proposes to Revise Land and 

Resource Management Plan, Barbour, 

Grant, Greenbrier, Nicholas, Pendleton, 

Pocahontab, Preston, Randolph, Tucker, 

Webster Counties, WV. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about the 

potential for impacts to air and water 

quality, and habitat. 

Rating EC1. 

EIS No. 20050378, ERP No. D–COE–

C39018–NJ, Liberty State Park 

Ecosystem Restoration Project, Hudson 

Raritan Estuary Study, To Address the 

Adverse Impacts Associated with Past 

Filling Activities, Port Authority of New 

York and New Jersey, Jersey City, 

Hudson County, NJ. 

Summary: EPA does not object to the 

implementation of the preferred 

alternative. 

Rating LO. 

EIS No. 20050386, ERP No. D–NOA–

L39063–AK, Office of Ocean and Coastal 

Resource Management Approval of 

Amendments to the State of Alaska’s 

Coastal Management Program, 

Implementation, Funding, AK. 

Summary: EPA is concerned about the 

potential negative impacts to biological, 

cultural and subsistence resources, and 

subsistence users in coastal Alaska 

communities due to the limited range of 

alternatives analyzed, lack of 

cumulative effects analysis, 

environmental justice concerns and lack 

of documentation of effective 

government to government consultation 

with affected Alaska Native tribes. 

Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20050397, ERP No. D–BIA–

L65495–ID, PROGRAMMATIC—Coeur 

d’ Alene Tribe Integrated Resource 

Management Plan, Implementation, 

Coeur d’ Alene Reservation and 

Aboriginal Territory , ID. 

Summary: While EPA has no 

objection to the proposed action, we did 

request clarification on how predicted 

harvest levels/habitat acreage compared 

to historic ranges/sizes and on nonnative species. 

Rating LO. 

EIS No. 20050404, ERP No. D–NPS–

F65076–OH, First Ladies National 

Historic Site General Management Plan, 

Implementation, Canton, OH. 

Summary: EPA has no objections to 

the preferred alternative. 

Rating LO. 

EIS No. 20050416, ERP No. D–NOA–

G90016–TX, Programmatic—Texas 

National Estuarine Research Reserve 

and Management Plan, Mission-Aransas 

Estuary, Site Designation, Federal 

Approval, TX. 

Summary: EPA had no objections to 

the preferred alternative. 

Rating LO. 

EIS No. 20050395, ERP No. DS–HUD–

K80045–CA, Stillwater Business Park, 

New and Revised Information, 

Development of Business Park, 

Annexation AN1–01, Shastec 

Redevelopment Project Area, Airport 

Land Use Plan Amendment , PreZone, General Plan Amendment 

GPA–2–01, Rezone RZ–1–01, Funding 

and U.S. Army COE 404 Permit, City 

of Redding, Shasta County, CA. 

Summary: EPA has environmental 

concerns about alternatives, off-site 

mitigation, cumulative impacts to 

habitat/hydrology, and induced growth 

impacts. 

Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20050422, ERP No. DS–COE–

–G36072–AR, Fourche Bayou Basin 

Project, 1,750 Acre Bottomland 

Acquisition with Nature Appreciation 

Facilities, Development, Funding, City 

of Little Rock, Pulaski County, AR. 

Summary: EPA strongly supports the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to 

proceed with purchase of the 1,750 

acres of bottomland hardwoods and has 

no objections to the preferred 

alternative. 

Rating LO. 

Final EISs 

EIS No. 20050336, ERP No. F–FAA–

D40328–VA, Washington Dulles 

International Airport Project, 

Acquisition of Land, Construction and 

Operation, IAD 2004 Airport Layout 

Plan (ALP), Dulles, VA. 

Summary: EPA continues to be 

concerned about mitigation proposed 

for wetland and stream impacts. In 

addition, EPA expressed concern about 

air toxic modeling. 

EIS No. 20050384, ERP No. F–COE–

D39029–DC, Washington Aqueduct’s 

Project, Proposed Water Treatment 

Residuals Management Process, NPDES 

Permit, Dalecarlia and McMillan Water 

Treatment Plants, Potomac River, 

Washington, DC. 

Summary: EPA believes that the Final 

EIS adequately considers the potential 

impacts of the preferred and other 

alternatives and has no objections to its 

implementation. 

EIS No. 20050430, ERP No. F–COE–

D36075–PA, The Town of Bloomsburg, 

Columbia County, Pennsylvania Flood 

Damage Reduction Project, 

Implementation, Integrated Feasibility 

Report, Susquehanna River and Fishing 

Creek, Town of Bloomsburg, Columbia 

County, PA. 

Summary: EPA has no objection to the 

proposed action. 

Dated: November 29, 2005. 

Robert W. Hargrove, 

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. E5–6761 Filed 12–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–6669–8] 

Environmental Impacts Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–7167 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/. 

72300 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 231 / Friday, December 2, 2005 / Notices 

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact 

Statements 

Filed 11/21/2005 through 11/25/2005 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 

EIS No. 20050497, Third Final EIS 

(Tiering), FHW, MO, Interstate 70 

Corridor Improvements, Section of 

Independent Utility #7, a 40-Mile 

Portion of the I–70 Corridor from just 

West of Route 19 (milepost 174) to 

Lake St. Louis Boulevard (milepost 

214) Montgomery, Warren, St. Charles 

Counties, MO. Wait Period Ends: 01/ 

03/2006. Contact: Peggy Casey 573–

636–7104. 

EIS No. 20050498, Draft EIS, BLM, WY, 

Seminoe Road Natural Gas 

Development Project, Proposed 

Coalbed Natural Gas Development 

and Operation, Carbon County, WY. 

Comment Period Ends: 01/31/2006. 

Contact: David Simons 307–328–

4328. 

EIS No. 20050499, Final EIS, AFS, MO, 

Mark Twain National Forest Land and 

Resource Management Plan, 

Implementation, Revise to the 1986 

Land and Resource Management Plan, 

several counties, MO. Wait Period 

Ends: 01/03/2006. Contact: Laura 

Watts 573–341–7471. 

EIS No. 20050500, Draft EIS, AFS, ID, 

Newsome Creek Watershed 

Rehabilitation, Stream Restoration 

and Improvement and 

Decommissioning of Roads, Red River 

Ranger District, Nez Perce National 

Forest, Idaho County, ID. Comment 

Period Ends: 01/17/2006. Contact: 

Stephanie Bransford 208–842–2113. 

Amended Notices 

EIS No. 20050350, Draft EIS, COE, CA, 

Encinitas/Solana Beach Shoreline 

Protection Project, To Protect Public 

Safety and Reduce Storm-Related 

Damages to Coastal Structures, Cities 

of Encinitas and Solana Beach, San 

Diego County, CA. Comment Period 

Ends: 01/17/2006. Contact: Shannon 

Dellaquila 213–452–3846. Revision to 

FR Notice Published 08/26/2005. 

Comment Period Extended from 10/ 

11/2005 to 01/17/2006. 

Dated: November 29, 2005. 

Robert W. Hargrove, 

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. 05–23557 Filed 12–1–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

Draft Air Quality Criteria for Lead 

[E-Docket ID No. ORD–2004–0018; FRL–

8004–3] 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Notice of public comment 

period on a first external review draft. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing 

a public comment period for the draft 

document titled, ‘‘Air Quality Criteria 

for Lead; First External Review Draft’’

(EPA/600/R–05/144). The document 

was prepared by the National Center for 

Environmental Assessment within 

EPA’s Office of Research and 

Development. 

EPA is releasing this draft document 

solely for the purpose of seeking public 

comment. It does not represent and 

should not be construed to represent 

any Agency policy, viewpoint, or 

determination. EPA will consider any 

public comments submitted in 

accordance with this notice when 

revising the document. 

DATES: The public comment period 

begins on or about December 1, 2005, 

and ends February 15, 2006. Technical 

comments should be in writing and 

must be received by EPA by February 

15, 2006. Comments may be submitted 

electronically via EPA’s E-Docket, by 

mail, by facsimile, or by hand delivery/ 

courier. Please follow the detailed 

instructions as provided in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this notice. 

ADDRESSES: The draft ‘‘Air Quality 

Criteria for Lead; First External Review 

Draft’’ is available primarily via the 

Internet on the National Center for 

Environmental Assessment’s home page 

under the Recent Additions and 

Publications menus at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ncea. A limited number of 

CD–ROM or paper copies will be 

available. Contact Ms. Diane Ray by 

phone (919–541–3637), fax (919–541–

1818), or e-mail (ray.diane@epa.gov) to 

request either of these, and please 

provide your name, your mailing 

address, and the document title, ‘‘Air 

Quality Criteria for Lead; First External 

Review Draft,’’ (EPA/600/R–05/144) to 

facilitate processing of your request. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information on the public comment 

period, contact the Office of 

Environmental Information Docket; 

telephone: 202–566–1752; facsimile: 

202–566–1753; or e-mail: 

ORD.Docket@epa.gov. 

For technical information, contact 

Lori White, Ph.D., NCEA; telephone: 

919–541–3146; facsimile: 919–541–

1818; or e-mail: white.lori@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Information about the Project/ 

Document 

Section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act 

directs the Administrator to identify 

certain pollutants which ‘‘may 

reasonably be anticipated to endanger 

public health and welfare’’ and to issue 

air quality criteria for them. These air 

quality criteria are to ‘‘accurately reflect 

the latest scientific knowledge useful in 

indicating the kind and extent of all 

identifiable effects on public health or 

welfare which may be expected from the 

presence of [a] pollutant in the ambient 

air * * *.’’ Under section 109 of the 

Act, EPA is then to establish National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for each pollutant for which 

EPA has issued criteria. Section 109(d) 

of the Act requires subsequent periodic 

review and, if appropriate, revision of 

existing air quality criteria to reflect 

advances in scientific knowledge on the 

effects of the pollutant on public health 

and welfare. EPA is also to revise the 

NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the 

revised criteria. 

Lead is one of six ‘‘criteria’’ pollutants 

for which EPA has established air 

quality criteria and NAAQS. On 

November 9, 2004 (69 FR 64926), EPA 

formally initiated its current review of 

the criteria and NAAQS for lead, 

requesting the submission of recent 

scientific information on specified 

topics. One of the next steps in this 

process was to prepare a project work 

plan for revision of the existing ‘‘Air 

Quality Criteria for Lead,’’ EPA–600/8–

83/028aF–dF (published in June 1986) 

and an associated supplement (EPA–

600/8–89/049F) published in 1990. 

Accordingly, a draft of EPA’s ‘‘Project 

Work Plan for Revised Air Quality 

Criteria for Lead’’ (NCEA–R–1465) was 

released on January 7, 2005 for public 

comment (70 FR 1439) and was 

discussed by the Clean Air Scientific 

Advisory Committee (CASAC) via a 

publicly accessible March 28, 2005, 

teleconference consultation (70 FR 

11629). On July 15, 2005 (70 FR 41007), 

several workshops were announced to 

discuss, with invited recognized 

scientific experts, initial draft materials 

that dealt with various lead-related 

issues being addressed in the draft 

AQCD for lead. These workshops were 

held August 4–5, 16–18, and 17–19, 

2005. 

After the end of the comment period 

on the Air Quality Criteria for Lead, 

First External Review Draft, EPA will