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 7, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 236)]
[Notices]
[Page 63533-63534]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07de01-30]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-6624-4]
 
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 May 18, 2001 (66 FR 
27647).

Draft EISs

    ERP No. D-AFS-K65236-AZ Rating LO, Buck Springs Range Allotment 
Rangeland Management, Implementation, Blue Ridge Coconino National 
Forest, Coconino County, AZ.
    Summary: EPA supports the dual objectives of providing grazing land 
and protecting sensitive habitat analyzed in the Buck Springs Range 
Allotment DEIS. EPA has no objections to the proposed project.
    ERP No. D-AFS-L65390-ID Rating EO2, Garnet Stars and Sands Project, 
To Test and Develop Future Recreation, Garnet, Idaho Panhandle National 
Forests, St. Joe Ranger District, Latah, Shoshone and Benewah Counties, 
ID.
    Summary: EPA had environmental objections because the proposed 
project would likely worsen already impaired water quality and degrade 
habitat for listed and sensitive fish species and riparian areas. EPA 
recommended that the final EIS contain sufficient mitigation measures 
to conserve aquatic resources consistent with section 313 of the Clean 
Water Act, section 7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act and the Forest 
Plan, utilize the Forest Service's Protocol for 303(d) Waters and 
include a comprehensive monitoring plan specifically tied to the 
project.
    ERP No. D-APH-A65169-00 Rating EC2, Programmatic--EIS Rangeland 
Grasshopper and Mormon Cricket Suppression Program, Authorization, 
Funding and Implementation in 17 Western States, AZ, CA, CO, ID, KS, 
MT, NB, NV, NM, ND, OK, OR, SD, TX, UT, WA and WY.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns since the draft EIS 
did not fully identify a proposed action nor fully analyze a reasonable 
range of alternatives. EPA requested that additional information and 
analyses be available in the final EIS.
    ERP No. D-BLM-K65235-AZ Rating LO, Las Cienegas Resource Management 
Plan, Implementation, Las Cienegas National Conservation Area (NCA) and 
Sonoita Valley Acquisition Planning District, AZ.
    Summary: EPA expressed a lack of environmental objections to the 
proposed project. ERP No. D-FHW-F40398-IN Rating EO2, Indianapolis 
Northeast Corridor Transportation Connections Study, To Identify 
Actions to Reduce Expected Year 2025 Traffic Congestion and Enhance 
Mobility, Between I-69: from I-465 to IN-328; I-465: from US 31 to I-
70; I-70: from I-65 to I-465: IN-37 from I-69 to Allisonville Road 
(Noblesville), Marion and Hamilton Counties, IN.
    Summary: EPA expressed objections to and requested additional 
information regarding: Alternatives, noise, air quality, wetlands, 
threatened and endangered species habitat, water quality/storm water 
management, flood plains and mitigation.
    ERP No. D-NOA-K36136-CA Rating EC2, Goat Canyon Enhancement 
Project, Implementation, Tijuana River Estuary, City and County of San 
Diego, CA.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding impacts to 
water quality, cumulative impacts and the objectives for improvements 
to Monument Road and the trail system. EPA requested that additional 
information be provided to address EPA's concerns on these issues.
    ERP No. DS-COE-E39054-FL Rating LO, Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow 
Protection, Interim Operating Plan (IOP), Updated Information on a New 
Alternative 7 for Emergency Sparrow Protection Actions, Implementation, 
Everglades National Park, Miami-Dade County, FL.
    Summary: EPA had no objection to the proposed action 
sinceAlternative 7 appears to address our previous water quality 
concerns, but still provides adequate protection to the Cape Sable 
Seaside Sparrow.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-AFS-L65232-OR, Deep Vegetation Management Project, 
Implementation, Ochoco National Forest, Paulina Ranger District, Crook 
and Wheeler Counties, OR.
    Summary: The final EIS adequately discloses the impacts and 
satisfactorily responded to most of EPA's previous comments on the 
draft EIS. In addition, the project overall should benefit the 
landscape. Therefore, EPA has no objection to the action as proposed.

[[Page 63534]]

    ERP No. F-DOE-E09807-TN Programmatic EIS--Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant 
Mission, Processing and Storage of Highly Enriched Uranium, U.S. 
Nuclear Weapons Stockpile, Anderson County, TN.
    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about 
construction impacts of the project.

    Dated: December 4, 2001.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 01-30381 Filed 12-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.