Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-4716-1]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared September 19, 1994 Through

September 23, 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-DOE-L20002-WA Rating LO, Safe Interim Storage of Hanford

Tank Wastes, Double Shell Tanks (DSTs) and Cross Site Transfer System

(CSTS) Construction, Hanford Site, Adams, Richland, Washington, Benton

and Franklin Counties, WA.

SUMMARY: EPA had no objections to the action as proposed.

ERP No. D-FHW-E40345-NC Rating EC2, NC-16 Upgrading and Relocating

Project, Construction, Lucia to North of NC-150, Funding, COE Section

404 Permit and NPDES Permit, Gaston, Lincoln and Catawba Counties, NC.

SUMMARY: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential

secondary development impacts and impacts to wetlands and water

quality. EPA requested additional information on these issues be

included in the final EIS.

ERP No. D-FHW-E40752-NC Rating EC2, NC-24 Transportation

Improvements Project, Construction from 2.8 miles east of I-25 to I-40,

Funding and COE Section 404 Permit, Cumberland, Sampson and Duplin

Counties, NC.

SUMMARY: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the impacts of

the Northern and modified Southern Alternative alignments and requests

additional information including: reconsideration of the upgrade

alternative; development of a wetland mitigation plan; and

reconsideration of noise mitigation.

ERP No. D-FHW-K40205-CA Rating EC2, US 101 Realignment

Construction, near Cushing Creek from Mile Post 20.3 to 22.3 South of

Crescent City, Funding and COE Permits, Del Norte County, CA.

SUMMARY: EPA expressed environmental concerns due to potential project

impacts to water quality and wetlands, and the potential need for

stormwater-related mitigation measures. EPA encouraged the adoption of

mitigation to control construction-related air emissions, chiefly

particulates, as no air mitigation is proposed in the draft EIS.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-NPS-K61127-CA Presidio of San Francisco General

Management Plan, Implementation, Golden Gate National Recreation Area,

City and County of San Francisco, CA.

SUMMARY: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding compliance

responsibilities under the Clean Air Act (for asbestos), the Safe

Drinking Water Act (for Presidio public water supplies), and the Toxic

Substance Control Act (for PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls). EPA

requests that details on/pursuant to the Acts mentioned above be

outlined in the Record of Decision.

Other

ERP No. LD-AFS-E61069-00 Rating LO, Hiwassee and Tellico Rivers,

Wild and Scenic Rivers Study, Suitability or Nonsuitability, National

Wild and Scenic River System, Cherokee National Forest and Nantahala

National Forest, Polk and Monroe Counties, TN and Cherokee County, NC.

SUMMARY: EPA had no objections to the proposed action and believes it

will be beneficial to the designated river corridors.

ERP No. LD-AFS-E65045-NC Rating LO, North Fork Mills, South Fork

Mills and Mills Rivers inclusion in the National Wild and Scenic River

System, Designation and Nondesignation, Wild and Scenic River Study,

Pisgah National Forest, Henderson and Transylvania Counties, NC.

SUMMARY: EPA had no objections to the proposed action and believes it

will be beneficial to the designated river corridors.

Dated: October 4, 1994.

Marshall Cain,

Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 94-24930 Filed 10-6-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE: 6560-50-U