Jump to main content.

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 
[Federal Register: December 21, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 245)]
[Notices]
[Page 72706-72707]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21de07-75]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-6694-3]

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 6, 2007 (72 FR 17156).

Draft EISs

EIS No. 20070385, ERP No. D-FHW-C40173-00, Peace Bridge Expansion
Project, Capacity Improvements to the Peace Bridge, Plazas and
Connecting Roadways, U.S. Coast Guard Bridge Permit, U.S. Army COE
Section 10 and 404 Permits. City of Buffalo, Erie County, NY and Town
of Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada. Summary: EPA expressed environmental
concerns about air impacts, particularly during the construction phase
of the project, as well as impacts to aquatic habitat. EPA also
recommends additional cumulative impacts analyses be done. Rating EC2.

[[Page 72707]]

EIS No. 20070409, ERP No. D-AFS-J65392-MT, Beartooth Ranger District
Travel Management Planning, Proposing to Designate Routes for Public
Motorized Use, and Change Management of Pack and Saddle Stock on
Certain Trail, Beartooth Ranger District, Custer National Forest,
Carbon, Stillwater, Sweet Grass, and Park Counties, MT. Summary: EPA
expressed environmental concerns about impacts to water quality,
fisheries, wildlife and other resources, and recommended that the
preferred alternative include modifications to reduce roads in high
hazard areas, avoid adding new roads and road decommissioning to reduce
risks to water quality and fisheries. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20070430, ERP No. D-FHW-E40818-NC, NC-119 Relocation Project,
Transportation Improvement from the I-185/40 Interchange Southwest of
Mebane to Existing NC-119 south of NC-1918 (Mrs White Lane) Mebane,
Right-of-Way Acquisition, Alamance County, NC. Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about impacts to streams, a historic property, a
water supply area, and possible residential relocations. Rating EC1.
EIS No. 20070451, ERP No. D-AFS-J65395-UT, Indian Springs Road
Realignment, Reducing Adverse Impacts to Watershed and Fisheries, U.S.
Army COE Section 404 Permit, Uinta National Forest, Heber Ranger
District, Wasatch County, UT. Summary: EPA expressed environmental
concerns about impacts to the roadless area, and requested that other
alternatives that would avoid the roadless area be investigated. If an
alternative is not available, EPA requested mitigation to offset
impacts to the roadless area. Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20070368, ERP No. DS-BLM-K67052-NV, Newmont Gold Mining, South
Operations Area Project Amendment, Updated Information on the
Cumulative Effects Analyses, Operation and Expansion, Plan of
Operations, Elko and Eureka Counties, NV. Summary: EPA continues to
have environmental objections to the project because of its potential
significant adverse impacts to water quality and the lack of sufficient
measures to ensure against acid rock drainage. We recommend the final
SEIS provide additional information regarding mine geochemistry,
measures to prevent acid drainage, mitigation for potential impacts to
pit lake water quality, water quality monitoring, mercury emissions and
controls, and financial assurance. Rating EO2.
EIS No. 20070369, ERP No. DS-BLM-K67056-NV, Leeville Mining Project,
Propose to Develop and Operate an Underground Mine and Ancillary
Facilities including Dewatering Operation, Updated Information on the
Cumulative Effects Analyses, Plan-of-Operations/Right-of-Way Permit and
COE Section 404 Permit, Elko and Eureka Counties, NV. Summary: EPA
continues to have environmental concerns because of the project's
potential significant adverse impacts to water quality and the lack of
sufficient measures to ensure against acid rock drainage. We recommend
the final SEIS provide additional information regarding mine
geochemistry, measures to prevent acid drainage, mercury emissions and
controls, and financial assurance. Rating EC2.

Final EISs

EIS No. 20070446, ERP No. F-FHW-F40438-IN, I-69 Evansville to
Indianapolis Project, I-69 Tier 2 Section 1: Evansville to Oakland
City, from 1-64 to IN-64, Preferred Alternative is 4, Gibson and
Warrick Counties, IN. Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed
project.
EIS No. 20070448, ERP No. F-USA-A15000-00, PROGRAMMATIC--Army Growth
and Force Structure Realignment, Implementation, Nationwide. Summary:
EPA does not object to the proposed project.
EIS No. 20070475, ERP No. F-FHW-H40191-KS, ADOPTION--Kansas Highway 10
(commonly known as South Lawrence Trafficway) Relocation, Issuance or
Denial of Section 404 Permit Request, Lawrence City, Douglas County,
KS. Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

    Dated: December 18, 2007.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E7-24843 Filed 12-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.