Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

Federal RegisterJul 15, 1994

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-4713-3]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared June 27, 1994 Through July 1,

1994 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)

260-5076.

An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental

impact statements (EISs) was published in the Federal Register dated

April 8, 1994 (59 FR 16807).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-APH-A82124-00 Rating EO2, Logs, Lumber and Other

Unmanufactured Wood Articles Importation, Improvements to the existing

system to Prohibit Introduction of Plant Pests into the United States.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections to the mandated use

of methyl bromide to treat whole logs. EPA requested that other

alternatives be considered.

ERP No. D-BLM-K67023-CA Rating EC2, Oro Cruz Operation of the

American Girl Canyon Project, Surface and Underground Mining, Plan of

Operations Approval, Imperial County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential

project impacts to water quality, wetlands and wildlife and the need

for additional information in the final EIS on water quality, air

quality and the mitigation of environmental impacts.

ERP No. D-USN-K11053-CA Rating EC2, Miramar Landfill General

Development Plan/Fiesta Island Replacement Project/Northern Sludge

Processing Facility/West Miramar Landfill Phase II/Overburden Disposal,

Implementation, Funding, COE Section 404 Permit and NPDES Permit, Naval

Air Station Miramar, San Diego County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns with potential

impacts to air quality, water resources, wetlands and biological

resources. EPA recommended that project construction be restricted

during peak air quality nonattainment periods and that the project be

designed to avoid vernal pool wetlands.

ERP No. DS-NOA-E64014-00 Rating EC2, Coral and Coral Reefs Fishery

Management Plan, Updated Information, Amendment 2 of the Gulf of Mexico

and South Atlantic.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns and requests

additional information on the proposed alternatives.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-FHW-K40192-CA CA-41 Improvements, Elkhorn Avenue to North

Avenue, Funding, Fresno County, CA.

Summary: Review of the Final EIS was not deemed necessary. No

comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. F-GSA-K80033-CA Sacramento Federal Building--United States

Courthouse, Site Selection and Construction within a portion of the

Central Business District, City of Sacramento, Sacramento County, CA.

Summary: Review of the Final EIS was not deemed necessary. No

comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. F-GSA-K81020-CA Ronald Reagan Federal Building--United

States Courthouse, Site Selection and Construction in the Central

Business Area and Approval of Permits, City of Santa Ana, Orange

County, CA.

Summary: EPA had no objections to the proposed project.

ERP No. F-USN-E11023-NC Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base, Wastewater

Treatment System Upgrading, Construction and Operation, NPDES, COE

Section 10 and 404 Permits, Onslow County, NC.

Summary: EPA had no objections to the proposed wastewater upgrade

at Camp Lejeune.

Regulations

ERP No. R-NRC-A09819-00 10 CFR Parts 34 and 150, Licenses for

Radiography and Radiation Safety Requirements for Radiographic

Operations, FR 59.9429.

Summary: EPA reviewed the proposed rule and recommended that the

frequency for field inspections remain quarterly until there is enough

experience with the revised regulation to warrant changing it.

ERP No. R-UAF-A10068-00 32 CFR Part 989, Environmental Impact

Analysis Process (EIAP) for the United States Air Force, Proposed Rule

(59 FR 17061).

Summary: EPA commended the Air Force on the proposed revisions and

made suggestions for documenting mitigation and for clarifying

categorical exclusions.

Dated: July 12, 1994.

Richard E. Sanderson,

Director, Office of Federal Activities

[FR Doc. 94-17286 Filed 7-14-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.