Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices 6025 

Business Information (CBI), or other 

information whose public disclosure is 

restricted by statute. For further 

information about the electronic docket, 

go to http://www.regulations.gov. 

Title: NESHAP for Printing and 

Publishing Industry (Renewal). 

ICR Numbers: EPA ICR Number 

1739.06, OMB Control Number 2060– 

0335. 

ICR Status: This ICR is schedule to 

expire on March 31, 2010. Under OMB 

regulations, the Agency may continue to 

conduct or sponsor the collection of 

information while this submission is 

pending at OMB. 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 in title 40 of the CFR, after 

appearing in the Federal Register when 

approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, 

and displayed either by publication in 

the Federal Register or by other 

appropriate means, such as on the 

related collection instrument or form, if 

applicable. The display of OMB control 

numbers in certain EPA regulations is 

consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. 

Abstract: The National Emission 

Standards of Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for Printing and Publishing 

Industry were proposed on March 14, 

1995 (60 FR 13664), promulgated on 

May 30, 1996 (61 FR 27131), and 

amended on May 24, 2006 (71 FR 

29792). These standards apply to the 

following facilities in 40 CFR subpart 

KK: Publication rotogravure, product 

and packaging rotogravure, and wideweb flexographic printing presses at 

major sources. The effective date was 

May 30, 1999, for sources existing on 

May 30, 1996. For new sources or 

reconstructed sources after May 30, 

1996, the effective date of startup is May 

30, 1996, whichever is later. 

Owners and operators of a new and 

existing area source are subject to the 

General Provision (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A). In general, all NESHAP 

standards require initial notifications, 

performance tests plans, and periodic 

reports by the owners/operators of the 

affected facilities. For the facilities 

installing continuous monitoring 

systems (CMS), there are performance 

test and maintenance reports. 

They are also required to maintain 

records of the occurrence and duration 

of any startup, shutdown, or 

malfunction in the operation of an 

affected facility, or any period during 

which the monitoring system is 

inoperative. These notifications, reports, 

and records are essential in determining 

compliance and are required of all 

affected facilities subject to NESHAP. 

Semiannual summary reports are also 

required. 

Any owner or operator subject to the 

provisions of this subpart must maintain 

a file of these measurements, and retain 

the file for at least five years following 

the collection of such measurements, 

maintenance reports, and records. 

All reports are sent to the delegated 

state or local authority. In the event that 

there is no such delegated authority, the 

reports are sent directly to the EPA 

regional office. This information is 

being collected to assure compliance 

with 40 CFR part 63, subpart KK, as 

authorized in sections 112 and 114(a) of 

the Clean Air Act. The required 

information consists of emissions data 

and other information that have been 

determined to be private. 

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 

Number for EPA regulations listed in 40 

CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15, are 

identified on the form and/or 

instrument, if applicable. 

Burden Statement: The annual public 

reporting and recordkeeping burden for 

this collection of information estimated 

to average 95 hour per response. Burden 

means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, retain, or disclose, 

and 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. All existing 

ways will have to adjust to comply with 

any previously applicable instructions 

and requirements that have 

subsequently changed; 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: 

Printing and publishing industry. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

352. 

Frequency of Response: Initially, 

annually, and semiannually. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

58,215. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$5,888,997, which includes $5,474,997 

in labor costs, $0 in capital/startup 

costs, and $414,000 in operation and 

maintenance (O&M) costs. 

Changes in the Estimates: There is a 

change in this ICR as compared to the 

previous one. Based on our discussions 

with the printing and publishing 

industry representatives, the printing 

industry in particular, will be 

experiencing essentially a flat 

production in the coming years with no 

new facilities anticipated. This ICR also 

reflects the most recent hourly labor 

rates which, takes into account the 

managerial, technical and clerical 

burdens as compared to the previous 

ICR. Corrections include a minor 

mathematical error and recalculation of 

the number of responses. 

There is a small increase in the 

capital/startup and operations and 

maintenance (O&M) costs from the 

previous ICR, which is due to roundingup the number of affective respondents. 

Dated: February 1, 2010. 

John Moses, 

Director, Collection Strategies Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2536 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–8988–1] 

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 

202–564–7146 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/. 

An explanation of the ratings assigned 

to draft environmental impact 

statements (EISs) was published in 

Federal Register dated July 17, 2009 (74 

FR 34754). 

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 Web site 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
6026 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 24 / Friday, February 5, 2010 / Notices 

satisfies the Section 309(a) requirement 

to make EPA’s comments on EISs 

available to the public. Accordingly, 

after March 31, 2010, EPA will 

discontinue the publication of this 

notice of availability of EPA comments 

in the Federal Register. 

Draft EISs 

EIS No. 20090210, ERP No. D–FRC– 

A03087–00, Ruby Pipeline Project, 

Proposed Natural Gas Pipeline 

Facilities, Right-of-Way Grants (and/ 

or Temporary Use or Special Use 

Permits), WY, UT, NV, and OR. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about impacts 

to perennial waters, wetlands, and 

impacts related to hydrostatic pipeline 

testing. Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090267, ERP No. D–AFS– 

J65546–MT, Bitterroot National Forest 

Travel Management Planning, To 

Address Conflicts between Motorized 

and Non-Motorized Users, Ravalli 

County, MT. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about impacts 

to watersheds and other resources. 

Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090424, ERP No. D–USN– 

L11043–AK, Gulf of Alaska Navy 

Training Activities, Proposal to 

Support and Conduct Current, 

Emerging, and Future Training 

Activities, Implementation, Gulf of 

Alaska, AK. 

Summary: EPA expressed 

environmental concerns about impacts 

to the marine environment from the 

deposition of expended training 

materials. Rating EC2. 

EIS No. 20090211, ERP No. DS–AFS– 

J61114–CO, Vail Ski Area’s 2007 

Improvement Project, Proposed OnMountain Restaurant from the top of 

Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, SpecialUse-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger 

District, White River National Forest, 

Eagle County, CO. 

Summary: No formal comment letter 

was sent to the preparing agency. Rating 

NC. 

Final EISs 

EIS No. 20090224, ERP No. F–AFS– 

J65531–SD, Telegraph Project Area, 

Proposes to Implement Multiple 

Resource Management Actions, 

Northern Hills Ranger District, Black 

Hills National Forest, Lawrence and 

Pennington Counties, SD. 

Summary: EPA continues to have 

environmental concerns about the need 

to develop a project level adaptive 

management plan. 

EIS No. 20090406, ERP No. F–AFS– 

K65350–CA, Modoc National Forest 

Motorized Travel Management Plan, 

Implementation, National Forest 

Transportation System (NFTS), 

Modoc, Lassen and Siskiyou 

Counties, CA. 

Summary: EPA continues to have 

environmental concerns about vernal 

pool and wet meadow impacts. 

EIS No. 20090427, ERP No. F–NPS– 

F60009–MN, Disposition of Bureau of 

Mines Property, Twin Cities Research 

Center Main Campus, 

Implementation, Hennepin County, 

MN. 

Summary: EPA commends the 

National Park Service for selecting the 

environmentally preferred alternative, 

and recommends that the Record of 

Decision clarify the future status of key 

cultural resources on site. 

EIS No. 20090440, ERP No. F–AFS– 

J61114–CO, Vail Ski Area’s 2007 

Improvement Project, Proposed OnMountain Restaurant from the top of 

Vail Mountain to Mid Vail, SpecialUse-Permit, Eagle/Holy Cross Ranger 

District, White River National Forest, 

Eagle County, CO. 

Summary: EPA does not object to the 

proposed action. 

EIS No. 20090446, ERP No. F–AFS– 

K65373–NV, Jarbidge Ranger District 

Rangeland Management Project, 

Proposed Reauthorizing Grazing on 21 

Existing Grazing Allotments, 

Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest, 

Elko County, NV. 

Summary: EPA’s previous concerns 

have been resolved; therefore, EPA does 

not object to the proposed action. 

EIS No. 20090449, ERP No. F–AFS– 

F65076–MI, Niagara Project, To 

Address Site-Specific Vegetation and 

Transportation System Needs in the 

Project Areas, Hiawatha National 

Forest, St. Ignace and Sault Ste. Marie 

Ranger Districts, Mackinac and 

Chippewa Counties, MI. 

Summary: EPA does not object to the 

proposed project. 

Dated: February 2, 2010. 

Robert W. Hargrove, 

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office 

of Federal Activities. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2572 Filed 2–4–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[ER–FRL–8987–9] 

Environmental Impact Statements; 

Notice of Availability 

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal 

Activities, General Information (202) 

564–1399 or http://www.epa.gov/ 

compliance/nepa/. 

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact 

Statements 

Filed 01/25/2010 through 01/29/2010 

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 

include 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 Web site 

satisfies the Section 309(a) requirement 

to make EPA’s comments on EISs 

available to the public. Accordingly, 

after March 31, 2010, EPA will 

discontinue the publication of this 

notice of availability of EPA comments 

in the Federal Register. 

EIS No. 20100024, Third Draft 

Supplement, USFS, 00, Southwest 

Idaho Ecogroup Land and Resource 

Management Plan, Updated 

Information to Reanalyze the Effects 

of Current and Proposed Management 

on Rock Mountain Bighorn Sheep 

Viability in the Payette National 

Forest 2003 FEIS, Boise National 

Forest, Payette National Forest and 

Sawtooth National Forest, Forest Plan 

Revision, Implementation, Several 

Counties, ID; Malhaur County, OR 

and Box Elder County, UT, Comment 

Period Ends: 03/22/2010, Contact: 

Pattie Sourcek 208–634–0700. 

EIS No. 20100025, Final EIS, USACE, 

NC, North Topsail Beach Shoreline 

Protection Project, Seeking Federal 

and State Permits to Allow 

Implementation of a Non-Federal 

Shoreline and Inlet Management 

Project, New River Inlet, Onslow 

County, NC, Wait Period Ends: 03/08/ 

2010, Contact: Mickey Sugg 910–251– 

4811. 

EIS No. 20100026, Final EIS, NOAA, 00, 

Amendment 31 to the Fishery 

Management Plan for Reef Fish 

Resources, Addresses Bycatch of Sea 

Turtles in the Bottom Longline 

Component of the Reef Fish Fishery, 

Gulf of Mexico, Wait Period Ends: 03/ 

08/2010, Contact: Roy E. Crabtree 

727–824–5701. 

EIS No. 20100027, Draft EIS, USFS, CA, 

Big Grizzly Fuels Reduction and 

Forest Health Project, Proposes 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES