61621
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
190
/
Tuesday,
October
1,
2002
/
Notices
Description
of
Alternatives
Construction
of
the
FHWA
preferred
alternative
will
require
removal
and
modification
of
Western's
transmission
system.
Western
evaluated
seven
preliminary
electrical
transmission
reconfiguration
options
as
part
of
the
EIS.
All
options
require
removal
of
existing
spans
and
towers
and
construction
of
new
spans.
Three
of
the
options
would
require
removal
of
the
existing
A&
N
Switchyard
and
replacing
a
single­
phase
circuit
with
a
doublephase
circuit
to
the
Mead
Substation
(
phase
two).
Additionally,
the
Sugarloaf
Mountain
Alternative
requires
a
realignment
of
two
of
the
Hoover­
Mead
transmission
lines
to
accommodate
the
new
highway
alignment.
Western
determined
the
best
engineering
approach
for
the
phase
one
and
two
modifications
discussed
above
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
electrical
conditions
on
the
transmission
lines
and
switchyards
and
current
transmission
line
construction
and
electrical
standards.
The
No
Action
Alternative
was
evaluated
in
the
EIS
and
found
to
not
meet
the
Project
purpose
and
need.

Mitigation
Measures
The
Final
EIS
identified
mitigation
measures
needed
to
reduce
the
impacts
of
the
Project.
The
specific
measures
are
discussed
in
the
FHWA
ROD
on
pages
22
to
35
and
in
Chapter
3
of
the
EIS.
Western
is
adopting
those
measures
that
are
applicable
to
its
action
and
will
issue
a
Mitigation
Action
Plan
(
MAP)
prior
to
any
construction
activities
that
will
address
the
adopted
and
standard
mitigation
measures.
Some
of
the
measures
include
restricting
vehicular
traffic
to
existing
access
roads
or
public
roads,
recontouring
and
reseeding
disturbed
areas,
environmental
awareness
training
for
all
construction
and
supervisory
personnel,
and
mitigation
of
radio
and
television
interference
generated
by
transmission
lines.
Long­
term
operations
of
the
transmission
line
will
follow
Western's
standard
operating
procedures
and
will
not
be
affected
by
this
action.
The
mitigation
that
applies
to
the
construction
of
the
new
lines
and
the
upgrading
of
the
existing
lines
includes
the
following
provisions:
1.
Protection
of
the
desert
tortoise
and
banded
Gila
monster
through
compliance
with
the
FHWA
Biological
Opinion.
2.
Protection
of
Cultural
and
Historical
resources
as
signators
to
the
Programmatic
Agreement.
3.
Adoption
of
mitigation
measures
as
specified
in
the
FWHA
EIS.
4.
Monitor
actions
for
compliance
with
Western's
standard
mitigation
measures.
This
ROD
has
been
prepared
in
accordance
with
Council
on
Environmental
Quality
regulations
for
implementing
NEPA
(
40
CFR
parts
1500
 
1508)
and
DOE
Procedures
for
Implementing
NEPA
(
10
CFR
part
1021).
Upon
approval,
the
MAP
will
be
made
available.

Dated:
September
20,
2002.
Michael
S.
Hacskaylo,
Administrator.
[
FR
Doc.
02
 
24862
Filed
9
 
30
 
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6450
 
01
 
P
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
FRL
 
7386
 
6]

Agency
Information
Collection
Activities:
Submission
for
OMB
Review;
Comment
Request;
Criteria
for
Classification
of
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
and
Practices,
Recordkeeping
and
Reporting
Requirements
 
40
CFR
Part
257,
Subpart
B
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In
compliance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.),
this
document
announces
that
the
following
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
has
been
forwarded
to
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
for
review
and
approval:
Criteria
for
Classification
of
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
and
Practices,
Recordkeeping
and
Reporting
requirements
 
40
CFR
Part
257,
Subpart
B,
ICR
#
1745.04,
OMB
Control
#
2050
 
0154,
expiring
September
30,
2002.
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
October
31,
2002.
ADDRESSES:
Send
comments,
referencing
EPA
ICR
No.
1745.04
and
OMB
Control
No.
2050
 
0154,
to
the
following
addresses:
Susan
Auby,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Collection
Strategies
Division
(
Mail
Code
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20460
 
0001;
and
to
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB),
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA,
725
17th
Street,
NW.,
Washington,
DC
20503.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
For
a
copy
of
the
ICR
contact
Susan
Auby
at
EPA
by
phone
at
(
202)
566
 
1672,
by
e­
mail
at
auby.
susan@
epa.
gov,
or
download
off
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
icr
and
refer
to
EPA
ICR
No.
1745.04.
For
technical
questions
about
the
ICR
contact
Paul
Cassidy
at
703
 
308
 
7281
in
the
Office
of
Solid
Waste.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Criteria
for
Classification
of
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
and
Practices,
Recordkeeping
and
Reporting
Requirements
 
40
CFR
Part
257,
Subpart
B
,
OMB
Control
No.
2050
 
0154,
EPA
ICR
No.
1745.04,
expiring
September
30,
2002.
This
is
a
request
for
extension
of
a
currently
approved
collection.
In
order
to
effectively
implement
and
enforce
final
changes
to
40
CFR
part
257,
subpart
B
on
a
State
level,
owners/
operators
of
construction
and
demolition
waste
landfills
that
receive
CESQG
hazardous
wastes
will
have
to
comply
with
the
final
reporting
and
recordkeeping
requirements.
The
1984
Hazardous
and
Solid
Waste
Amendments
(
HSWA)
to
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA),
as
amended,
mandated
that
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
revise
the
Criteria
for
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Facilities
that
may
receive
household
hazardous
wastes
and
conditionally
exempt
small
quantity
generator
(
CESQG)
wastes.
EPA
submitted
a
Report
to
Congress
in
October
1988
that
assessed
the
impacts
on
human
health
and
the
environment
associated
with
Subtitle
D
(
nonhazardous
waste)
units.
While
this
study
found
that
the
revised
Criteria
for
municipal
solid
waste
disposal
units
were
necessary
to
protect
human
health
and
the
environment,
the
report
failed
to
draw
a
conclusion
relating
to
industrial
Subtitle
D
units.
The
limited
data
on
such
units
indicated
that
there
might
be
a
basis
for
concern
and
further
study
was
needed.
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
document
required
under
5
CFR
1320.8(
d),
soliciting
comments
on
this
collection
of
information
was
published
on
May
1,
2002
(
67
FR
21668);
no
comments
were
received.
Burden
Statement:
The
annual
public
reporting
and
record
keeping
VerDate
Sep<
04>
2002
20:
26
Sep
30,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00048
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
01OCN1.
SGM
01OCN1
61622
Federal
Register
/
Vol.
67,
No.
190
/
Tuesday,
October
1,
2002
/
Notices
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
average
67
hours
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
Entities:
Construction
and
demolition
waste
landfill
owners/
operators
and
State
Agencies.
Estimated
Number
of
Respondents:
145.
Frequency
of
Response:
On
occasion.
Estimated
Total
Annual
Hour
Burden:
9,675
hours.
Estimated
Total
Annualized
Capital,
O&
M
Cost
Burden:
$
938.
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
addresses
listed
above.
Please
refer
to
EPA
ICR
No.
1745.04
and
OMB
Control
No.
2050
 
0154
in
any
correspondence.

Dated:
September
2,
2002.
Oscar
Morales,
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division.
[
FR
Doc.
02
 
24805
Filed
9
 
30
 
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
UT
 
001
 
0050;
FRL
 
7388
 
2]

Adequacy
Status
of
the
Utah
County,
Utah
PM10
State
Implementation
Plan
Revision
for
Transportation
Conformity
Purposes
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).
ACTION:
Notice
of
adequacy.

SUMMARY:
In
this
document,
EPA
is
notifying
the
public
that
we
have
found
that
the
motor
vehicle
emissions
budgets
(
for
2010
and
2020)
in
the
Utah
County,
Utah
particulate
matter
of
10
micrograms
in
size
or
smaller
(
PM10)
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)
revision
submitted
on
July
3,
2002,
are
adequate
for
conformity
purposes.
On
March
2,
1999,
the
D.
C.
Circuit
Court
ruled
that
submitted
SIPs
cannot
be
used
for
conformity
determinations
until
EPA
has
affirmatively
found
them
adequate.
As
a
result
of
our
finding,
the
Mountainland
Association
of
Governments,
the
Utah
Department
of
Transportation,
and
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation
are
required
to
use
the
2010
and
2020
motor
vehicle
emissions
budgets
from
this
submitted
SIP
revision
for
future
conformity
determinations.
DATES:
This
finding
is
effective
October
16,
2002.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Kerri
Fiedler,
Air
&
Radiation
Program
(
8P
 
AR),
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Region
8,
999
18th
Street,
Suite
300,
Denver,
Colorado
80202
 
2466,
(
303)
312
 
6493.
The
letter
documenting
our
finding
is
available
at
EPA's
conformity
website:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oms/
transp/
conform/
adequacy.
htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
Throughout
this
document
wherever
``
we,''
``
us,''
or
``
our''
are
used
we
mean
EPA.
This
action
is
simply
an
announcement
of
a
finding
that
we
have
already
made.
We
sent
a
letter
to
the
Utah
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
on
September
5,
2002
stating
that
the
2010
and
2020
PM10
and
NOX
motor
vehicle
emissions
budgets
in
the
submitted
Utah
County
PM10
SIP
revision
are
adequate.
This
finding
has
also
been
announced
on
our
conformity
website
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oms/
transp/
conform/
adequacy.
htm.
Transportation
conformity
is
required
by
section
176(
c)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act.
Our
conformity
rule
requires
that
transportation
plans,
programs,
and
projects
conform
to
SIPs
and
establishes
the
criteria
and
procedures
for
determining
whether
or
not
they
do.
Conformity
to
a
SIP
means
that
transportation
activities
will
not
produce
new
air
quality
violations,
worsen
existing
violations,
or
delay
timely
attainment
of
the
national
ambient
air
quality
standards.
The
criteria
by
which
we
determine
whether
a
SIP's
motor
vehicle
emission
budgets
are
adequate
for
conformity
purposes
are
outlined
in
40
CFR
93.118(
e)(
4).
Please
note
that
an
adequacy
review
is
separate
from
our
completeness
review,
and
it
also
should
not
be
used
to
prejudge
our
ultimate
approval
of
the
SIP.
Even
if
we
find
a
budget
adequate,
the
SIP
could
later
be
disapproved,
and
vice
versa.
We've
described
our
process
for
determining
the
adequacy
of
submitted
SIP
budgets
in
a
memo
entitled,
``
Conformity
Guidance
on
Implementation
of
March
2,
1999
Conformity
Court
Decision,''
dated
May
14,
1999.
We
followed
this
guidance
in
making
our
adequacy
determination.

Authority:
42
U.
S.
C.
7401
et
seq.

Dated:
September
23,
2002.

Robert
E.
Roberts,

Regional
Administrator,
Region
VIII.
[
FR
Doc.
02
 
24916
Filed
9
 
30
 
02;
8:
45
am]

BILLING
CODE
6560
 
50
 
P
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
[
FRL
 
7387
 
7]

EPA
Science
Advisory
Board,
Notification
of
Public
Advisory
Committee
Meetings
of
the
Contaminated
Sediment
Science
Plan
Review
Panel;
and
Notification
of
Cancelled
Meetings
of
the
Human
Health
Research
Strategy
Review
Panel
Pursuant
to
the
Federal
Advisory
Committee
Act,
Public
Law
92
 
463,
notice
is
hereby
given
of
three
meetings
of
the
Contaminated
Sediment
Science
Plan
Review
Panel
(
CSSP
Review
Panel)
of
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency's
(
EPA)
Science
Advisory
Board
(
SAB).
The
Panel
will
meet
on
the
dates
and
times
noted
below.
All
times
noted
are
Eastern
Time.
All
meetings
are
open
to
the
public,
however,
seating
is
limited
and
available
on
a
first
come
basis.
For
teleconference
meetings,
available
lines
may
also
be
limited.
Important
Notice:
The
document
that
is
the
subject
of
this
SAB
review,
Contaminated
Sediment
Science
Plan,
June
13,
2002
draft,
is
available
on
the
SAB
Web
site
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
sab/
panels/
cssprpanel.
html.
Any
questions
concerning
the
draft
document
should
be
directed
to
the
program
contact
noted
below.
Background
 
The
background
for
this
review
and
the
charge
to
the
panel
were
published
in
the
67
FR
49336,
July
30,
2002.
The
notice
also
included
a
draft
charge
to
the
panel,
a
call
for
nominations
for
members
of
the
panel
in
certain
technical
expertise
areas
needed
to
address
the
charge
and
described
the
process
to
be
used
in
forming
the
panel.

VerDate
Sep<
04>
2002
20:
26
Sep
30,
2002
Jkt
200001
PO
00000
Frm
00049
Fmt
4703
Sfmt
4703
E:\
FR\
FM\
01OCN1.
SGM
01OCN1
