Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Notices 52735 

to CWIS) and entrainment (where 

aquatic organisms, eggs, and larvae are 

taken into the cooling system, passed 

through the heat exchanger, and then 

pumped back out with the discharge 

from the facility). The 316(b) Phase II 

rule establishes requirements applicable 

to the location, design, construction, 

and capacity of CWISs at Phase II 

existing facilities. These requirements 

establish the BTA for minimizing 

adverse environmental impact 

associated with the use of CWISs. 

The 316(b) Phase II rule was signed 

on February 16, 2004. Industry and 

environmental groups, and a number of 

states filed legal challenges to the rule. 

Several issues were heard by the Second 

Circuit’s Court of Appeals, which issued 

a decision on January 25, 2007 

remanding portions of the rule (see 

Riverkeeper, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, No. 04– 

6692–ag(L) [2d Cir. Jan. 25, 2007]). 

Industry groups also petitioned the 

Supreme Court on several issues, which 

issued a decision on April 1, 2009. 

(Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc., No. 

07–588). EPA subsequently suspended 

the 316(b) Phase II rule on July 9, 2007 

and is currently in the process of 

developing a revised rule for existing 

facilities. However, permitting 

authorities are still required under 

section 301 of the CWA to establish 

BTA permit limits using best 

professional judgment. The existing 

Phase II rule provides a framework for 

the type of information a permit 

authority needs to establish appropriate 

BTA limits for CWISs. This ICR does not 

address the results of court decisions or 

any proposed regulation. 

Burden Statement: The annual 

average reporting and recordkeeping 

burden for the collection of information 

by facilities responding to the Section 

316(b) Phase II Existing Facility rule is 

estimated to be 2,071 hours per 

respondent. The state Director reporting 

and recordkeeping burden for the 

review, oversight, and administration of 

the rule is estimated to average 1,101 

hours per respondent. Burden means 

the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, or disclose or 

provide information to or for a Federal 

agency. This includes the time needed 

to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and use 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 information. 

Respondents/Affected Entities: 

Electric power generating facilities, 

State governments. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

514 (472 facilities and 42 states). 

Frequency of Response: Bi-annually, 

every five years. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

1,023,521 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$74,199,667. This includes an estimated 

burden cost of $64,224,198 and an 

estimated cost of $9,975,469 for capital 

investment or operation & maintenance. 

Changes in the Estimates: The change 

in burden results mainly from the shift 

from the approval period to the renewal 

period of the 316(b) Phase II Existing 

Facilities rule. The currently approved 

ICR (EPA ICR No. 2060.03) covers the 

last 2 years of the permit approval 

period (i.e., years 4 and 5 after 

implementation) and the first year of the 

renewal period (i.e., year 6 after 

implementation). This proposed ICR 

covers renewal of permits only (years 7 

to 9 after implementation). Activities for 

renewing an NPDES permit already 

issued under the 316(b) Phase II 

Existing Facilities rule are less 

burdensome than those for issuing a 

permit for the first time. 

Dated: August 23, 2010. 

Richard T. Westlund, 

Acting Director, Collection Strategies 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21426 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9189–7] 

Clean Water Act Section 303(d): 

Availability of List Decisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

availability of EPA’s decision 

identifying 12 water quality limited 

waterbodies and associated pollutants 

in South Dakota to be listed pursuant to 

the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)(2), 

and requests public comment. Section 

303(d)(2) requires that States submit and 

EPA approve or disapprove lists of 

waters for which existing technologybased pollution controls are not 

stringent enough to attain or maintain 

State water quality standards and for 

which total maximum daily loads 

(TMDLs) must be prepared. 

On July 9, 2010, EPA partially 

approved and partially disapproved 

South Dakota’s Section 303(d) list 

submittal for the 2010 listing cycle. 

Specifically, EPA approved South 

Dakota’s listing of 151 waters, 

associated pollutants, and associated 

priority rankings. EPA disapproved 

South Dakota’s decision to not include 

12 lakes that had been on the 2008 list. 

EPA evaluated all the existing and 

readily available data and information 

on the lakes and concluded that the 

beneficial uses for these lakes are not 

being fully met. Based on this 

evaluation EPA has determined that the 

following 12 lakes are not fully attaining 

the water quality standards established 

by the State of South Dakota and should 

be included on the State’s list of 

impaired waters: Waggoner Lake 

(Haakon County), Bierman Dam (Spink 

County), Lake Carthage (Miner County), 

Lake Isabel (Dewey County), Twin Lakes 

(Sanborn County), Wilmarth Lake 

(Aurora County), Rahn Lake (Tripp 

County), Cottonwood Lake (Sully 

County), East Vermillion Lake (McCook 

County), Bullhead Lake (Deuel County), 

Lake Campbell (Campbell County), and 

Lake Pocasse (Campbell County). 

EPA is providing the public the 

opportunity to review its decision to 

add these lakes to South Dakota’s 2010 

Section 303(d) list, as required by EPA’s 

Public Participation regulations. EPA 

will consider public comments in 

reaching its final decision to add these 

lakes to the State’s list. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted to 

EPA on or before September 27, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed 

decision should be sent to Tom Johnson, 

Water Quality Unit (8EPR–EP), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

CO 80202–1129, telephone (303) 312– 

6226, facsimile (303) 312–7206, e-mail 

johnson.tom@epa.gov. Oral comments 

will not be considered. Copies of EPA’s 

letter concerning South Dakota’s list 

that explains the rationale for EPA’s 

decision can be obtained at EPA Region 

8’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

region08/water/tmdl, or by writing or 

calling Mr. Johnson at the above 

address. Underlying documents from 

the administrative record for these 

decisions are available for public 

inspection at the above address. Please 

contact Mr. Johnson to schedule an 

inspection. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom 

Johnson at (303) 312–6226 or johnson.

tom@epa.gov. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

52736 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 166 / Friday, August 27, 2010 / Notices 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

303(d) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) 

requires that each State identify those 

waters for which existing technologybased pollution controls are not 

stringent enough to attain or maintain 

State water quality standards. For those 

waters, States are required to establish 

TMDLs according to a priority ranking. 

EPA’s Water Quality Planning and 

Management regulations include 

requirements related to the 

implementation of Section 303(d) of the 

CWA (40 CFR 130.7). The regulations 

require States to identify water-qualitylimited waters still requiring TMDLs 

every two years. The lists of waters still 

needing TMDLs must also include 

priority rankings, identify the pollutants 

causing the impairment, and must 

identify the waters targeted for TMDL 

development during the next two years 

(40 CFR 130.7). 

Consistent with EPA’s regulations, 

South Dakota submitted to EPA its 

listing decisions under Section 303(d)(2) 

in correspondence dated March 29, 

2010. On July 9, 2010, EPA approved 

South Dakota’s listing of 151 waters and 

associated priority rankings. EPA 

disapproved South Dakota’s decision 

not to include 12 lakes in its list. EPA 

solicits public comment on the addition 

of these 12 lakes to the State’s list, as 

required by EPA’s Public Participation 

regulations (40 CFR Part 25). 

Authority: Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251 

et seq. 

Dated: August 4, 2010. 

Martin Hestmark, 

Acting Assistant Regional Administrator, 

Office of Ecosystems Protection and 

Remediation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–21390 Filed 8–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–8992–4] 

Environmental Impacts Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–1399 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/3. 

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact 

Statements. 

Filed 08/16/2010 Through 08/20/2010. 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. 

Notice 

In accordance with Section 309(a) of 

the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to 

make its comments on EISs issued by 

other Federal agencies public. 

Historically, EPA has met this mandate 

by publishing weekly notices of 

availability of EPA comments, which 

includes a brief summary of EPA’s 

comment letters, in the Federal 

Register. Since February 2008, EPA has 

been including its comment letters on 

EISs on its Web site at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/ 

eisdata.html. Including the entire EIS 

comment letters on the website satisfies 

the Section 309(a) requirement to make 

EPA’s comments on EISs available to 

the public. Accordingly, on March 31, 

2010, EPA discontinued the publication 

of the notice of availability of EPA 

comments in the Federal Register. 

EIS No. 20100317, Final EIS, NOAA, 00, 

PROGRAMMATIC—Coral Restoration 

in the Florida Keys and Flower 

Garden Banks National Marine 

Sanctuaries, Implementation, FL, TX, 

and LA, Wait Period Ends: 09/27/ 

2010, Contact: Alice Stratton 203– 

882–6515. 

EIS No. 20100330, Final EIS, USFS, OR, 

Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) 

Management Plan, Including Forest 

Plan Amendment #17, Designation of 

Roads, Trails and Areas for OHV Use 

on Mt. Hood National Forest, 

Implementation, Clackamas, Hood 

River, Multnomah, and Wasco 

Counties, OR, Wait Period Ends: 09/ 

27/2010, Contact: Michelle Lombardo 

503–668–1796. 

EIS No. 20100331, Draft EIS, NOAA, 00, 

Harvest Specifications and 

Management Measures for the 2011– 

2012 Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery 

and Amendment 16–5 to the Pacific 

Coast Groundfish Fishery 

Management Plan, and Adopt a 

Rebuilding Plan for Petrale Sole, RIN– 

0648–BA01, WA, OR and CA, 

Comment Period Ends: 10/12/2010, 

Contact: William W. Steele, Jr. 206– 

526–6150. 

EIS No. 20100332, Final EIS, NPS, MD, 

Monocacy National Battlefield, 

General Management Plan, 

Implementation, Frederick County, 

MD, Wait Period Ends: 09/27/2010, 

Contact: Susan Trail 301–694–3147. 

EIS No. 20100333, Final EIS, NPS, 00, 

Harpers Ferry National Historical 

Park, General Management Plan, 

Implementation, Harpers Ferry, 

Jefferson County, WV; Loudoun 

County, VA; and Washington County, 

MD, Wait Period Ends: 09/27/2010, 

Contact: Rebecca L. Harriett 304–535– 

6224. 

EIS No. 20100334, Final EIS, FAA, PA, 

Philadelphia International Airport 

(PHL) Capacity Enhancement Program 

(CEP) To Accommodate Current and 

Future Aviation Demand, Funding 

and U.S. Army COE Section 404 

Permit, Philadelphia, PA, Wait Period 

Ends: 09/27/2010, Contact: Susan 

McDonald 717–730–2841. 

EIS No. 20100335, Draft Supplement, 

NOAA, 00, Amendment 11 to the 

Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and 

Butterfish (MSB), Update Information 

MSB Essential Fish Habitat; Establish 

a Mackerel Recreational Allocation; 

Establish a Cap to Limit the At-Sea 

Processing of Mackerel, Fishery 

Management Plan (FMP), Establish an 

Atlantic Mackerel Limited Access 

Program, Implementation, Comment 

Period Ends: 10/12/2010, Contact: 

Patricia A. KurKul 978–281–9250. 

EIS No. 20100336, Draft EIS, FTA, NC, 

LYNX—Blue Line Extension 

Northeast Corridor Light Rail Project, 

Proposed Light Rail Extension from 

Center City Charlotte to I–485 near the 

Mecklenburg-Cabarrus County Line, 

Charlotte-Mecklenburg County, NC, 

Comment Period Ends: 10/12/2010, 

Contact: Keith Melton 404–856–5600 

This document is available on the 

Internet at: http://charmeck.org/city/ 

charlotte/cats/planning/BLE/Pages/ 

deisstudy.aspx. 

EIS No. 20100337, Final EIS, NRC, WY, 

Moore Ranch In-Situ Uranium 

Recovery (ISR) Project, Proposal to 

Construct, Operate, Conduct Aquifer 

Restoration, and Decommission an InSitu Recovery (ISR) Facility, NUREG– 

1910, Campbell County, WY, Wait 

Period Ends: 09/27/2010, Contact: 

Behram Shroff 301–415–0666. 

EIS No. 20100338, Draft EIS, BLM, CA, 

First Solar Desert Sunlight Solar Farm 

(DSSF) Project, Proposing To Develop 

a 550-Megawatt Photovoltaic Solar 

Project, Also Proposes to Facilitate the 

Construction and Operation of the 

Red Bluff Substation, California 

Desert Conservation Area (CDCA 

Plan, Riverside County, CA, Comment 

Period Ends: 11/26/2010, Contact: 

Allison Shaffer 760–833–7100. 

EIS No. 20100339, Final EIS, BLM, CA, 

Genesis Solar Energy Project, 

Application for a Right-of-Way Grant 

to Construct, Operate and 

Decommission a Solar Thermal 

Facility on Public Lands, California 

Desert Conservation Area Plan, 

Riverside County, CA, Wait Period 

Ends: 09/27/2010, Contact: Allison 

Shaffer 760–833–7104. 

EIS No. 20100340, Final EIS, USA, WA, 

Fort Lewis Army Growth and Force 

Structures Realignment, 

Implementation, Fort Lewis and 

Yakima Training Center, Kittitas, 

Pierce, Thurston and Yakima 

Counties, WA, Wait Period Ends: 09/ 

27/2010, Contact: Lisa Booher 410– 

436–2405. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES