33734 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Notices

Abstract: TSCA section 6(e) generally

prohibits the manufacture, processing,

distribution in commerce, and use of

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).

However, federal regulations exclude

certain manufacturing processes from

these prohibitions, enabling chemical

manufacturers to continue to

manufacture essential chemical

products, the manufacture of which is

accompanied by the inadvertent

generation of PCBs as trace byproducts

or impurities. To be eligible for such an

exclusion, chemical manufacturers must

comply with certain certification,

reporting and recordkeeping

requirements. These requirements

provide the means for EPA to verify that

companies indeed generate only trace

quantities of PCBs in their products and

thus do not present an unreasonable risk

of injury to human health or the

environment. EPA also uses the data to

identify sites for compliance

inspections.

Responses to the collection of

information are mandatory (see 40 CFR

part 761). Respondents may claim all or

part of a notice confidential. EPA will

disclose information that is covered by

a claim of confidentiality only to the

extent permitted by, and in accordance

with, the procedures in TSCA section 14

and 40 CFR part 2.

Burden statement: The burden to

respondents for complying with this ICR

is estimated to total 1,030 hours per

year, based on an average burden of

approximately 25 hours per response for

an estimated six respondents submitting

a one-time report of information, and an

average burden of approximately 5

hours for an estimated 176 respondents

maintaining required records. These

estimates include 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.

III. Public Record

A record has been established for this

action under docket number ‘‘OPPTS00185’’ (including comments and data

submitted electronically as described

below). A public version of this record,

including printed, paper versions of

electronic comments, which does not

include any information claimed as CBI,

is available for inspection from noon to

4 p.m., Monday through Friday,

excluding legal holidays. The public

record is located in the TSCA

Nonconfidential Information Center,

Rm. NE-B607, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

Electronic comments can be sent

directly to EPA at:

oppt.ncic@epamail.epa.gov

Electronic comments must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption.

The official record for this action, as

well as the public version, as described

above will be kept in paper form.

Accordingly, EPA will transfer all

comments received electronically into

printed, paper form as they are received

and will place the paper copies in the

official record which will also include

all comments submitted directly in

writing. The official record is the paper

record maintained at the address in

ADDRESSES at the beginning of this

document.

List of Subjects

Environmental protection and

Information collection requests.

Dated: June 18, 1996.

Lynn R. Goldman,

Assistant Administrator for Prevention,

Pesticides and Toxic Substances.

[FR Doc. 96–16589 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

[FRL–5521–1 OMB No. 2070–0081; EPA ICR

No. 1289.04]

Agency Information Collection

Activities Under OMB Review; Wood

Preservatives—Submission of

Information Regarding Arsenic

Exposure Levels in Wood Treatment

Plants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3507(a)(1)(D)), this notice announces

that the Information Collection Request

(ICR) for Wood Preservative—

Submission of Information Regarding

Arsenic Exposure Levels in Wood

Treatment Plants described below has

been forwarded to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for

review and comment. The ICR describes

the nature of the information collection

and its expected burden and cost; where

appropriate, it includes the actual data

collection instrument.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before July 29, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY

CALL: Sandy Farmer at EPA, (202) 260–

2740, and refer to EPA ICR No. 1289.04.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Wood Preservatives—

Submission of Information Regarding

Arsenic Exposure Levels in Wood

Treatment Plants (OMB Control Number

2070–0081; EPA ICR No. 1289.04). This

is a request for an extension of a

currently approved collection.

Abstract: This information collection

provides wood treaters that use arsenic

formulations a way of exempting

themselves from the FIFRA pesticide

label requirements, which dictate that

all applicators of the registered pesticide

product wear NIOSH approved

respirators. The program that provides

this opportunity for facilities to exempt

themselves from the respirator

requirements is called the Permissible

Exposure Limit Monitoring Program

(PEL) and it is incorporated into the

‘‘Notice of Intent to Cancel Registrations

of Pesticide Product Containing

Creosote, Pentachlorophenol (Including

Its Salts) and Inorganic Arsenic.’’ It was

published in the July 1984 Federal

Register, vol. 49, No. 136, p. 28674.

Facilities that choose to participate in

the voluntary PEL can do the following

to exempt themselves from the

respirator requirements. First, the

facility operator needs to conduct

monitoring for air-borne arsenic.

Operators with facilities that have airborne arsenic levels that are higher than

the permissible exposure limit would

have to continue to require plant

personnel to wear respirators. If a

facility’s air-borne arsenic levels are

below the permissible exposure limit,

plant personnel would no longer be

required to wear respirators. Depending

on how close the levels are to the

permissible exposure limit, the facility

would be required to retest periodically

or fill out a checklist, which indicates

if arsenic exposure levels are likely to

increase due to changes in the facility’s

industrial process.

Participating facilities must submit

the air monitoring test results to EPA or,

if arsenic levels are low and testing is

not required, then they can simply fill

out the checklist and submit it to EPA.

All submissions must certify that the

information provided is accurate.

EPA uses the certification and air

monitoring data to determine if the

wood preserving facility is complying

with the air-borne arsenic levels set by

the cancellation order, which was set to

ensure that plant personnel are not

exposed to levels of arsenic that pose an
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 126 / Friday, June 28, 1996 / Notices 33735

unacceptably high health risk. This data

will also be used to monitor which

wood treatment facilities are

participating in the PEL and thus could

be exempt from the pesticide label

requirement to wear a respirator.

Because the information that would be

submitted to EPA is not confidential

business information it will not be

handled as such.

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 Notice required

under 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting

comments on this collection of

information was published on 03/26/96

(61 FR 13190).

Burden Statement: The annual public

reporting and record keeping burden for

this collection of information is

estimated to average 3 hours and 30

minutes per response. 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 Entitles: 300.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

250.

Estimated Number of Responses: 250.

Frequency of Response: once per year.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:

888 hours.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden: $0

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 following addresses.

Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1289.04 and

OMB Control No. 2070–0081 in any

correspondence.

Ms. Sandy Farmer, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, OPPE Regulatory

Information Division (2137), 401 M

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

and

Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for

EPA, 725 17th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20503.

Dated: June 20, 1996.

Richard Westlund,

Acting Director, Regulatory Information

Division.

[FR Doc. 96–16584 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

[ER–FRL–5470–9]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared June 17, 1996 Through June

21, 1996 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 05, 1996 (61 FR 15251).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–AFS–L60103–AK Rating

EC2, Swanlake-Lake Tyee Intertie

Project, Electrical Transmission Line

and Associated Facilities

Construction and Operation,

Northwestern Portion of Revillagigedo

Island from Upper Carroll Inlet to

Behm Canal and the Northeastern

Portion of Cleveland Peninsula from

Spacious Bay to Bradfield Canal,

Special-Use-Permit Issuance, Tongass.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns regarding the

project’s impacts to fish populations in

Lake Tyee. EPA requested clarification

of this issue.

ERP No. D–AFS–L65267–AK Rating LO,

Helicopter Landings within

Wilderness, Implementation, Tongass

National Forest, Chatham, Stikine and

Ketchikan Area, AK.

Summary: EPA’s abbreviated review

has revealed no environmental concerns

on this project.

ERP No. D–FAA–C51019–NY Rating

EC2, LaGuardia Airport East End

Roadway Improvements Project, Four

New Ramps at the 102nd Street

Bridge Construction, Airport Layout

Plan Approval and Funding, Queens

County, NY.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns regarding the

proposed project’s conformity with the

SIP. EPA requested that additional

information be provided.

ERP No. D–NPS–C61009–NY Rating LO,

Manhattan Sites General Management

Plans, Implementation, Castle Clinton

National Monument, Federal Hall

National Memorial, General Grant

National Memorial, Saint Paul’s

Church National Historic Site and

Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace

National Historic Site, New York and

Westchester Counties, NY.

Summary: EPA believed that the

proposed project will not result in

significant adverse environmental

impact; therefore, EPA had no objection

to its implementation.

Final EISs

ERP No. F–USN–K11065–CA, Miramar

Naval Air Station (NAS) Realignment

or Conversion to Miramar Marine

Corps Air Station, Implementation,

San Diego, CA.

Summary: EPA continued to have

environmental concerns regarding full

disclosure of noise complaints and

documentation of comment responses.

ERP No. F–USN–K11066–CA, Camp

Pendleton Marine Corps Air Station/

Marine Corps Base (MCAS/MCB)

Realignment and Tustin and EL Toro

Marine Corps Bases Closure,

Implementation and COE Section 404

Permit Issuance, San Diego County,

CA.

Summary: EPA continued to express

environmental concerns regarding water

quality, wetlands, cumulative impacts

and flood control.

Dated: June 25, 1996.

B. Katherine Biggs,

Associate Director, NEPA Compliance

Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 96–16605 Filed 6–27–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

[ER–FRL–5470–8]

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 June 17, 1996 Through

June 21, 1996 Pursuant to 40 CFR

1506.9.

EIS No. 960285, Final EIS, AFS, TX,

Texas National Forests and

Grasslands Revised Land and