# Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-3303 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** February 11, 1994 ## Text ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-4708-4] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared January 24, 1994 through January 28, 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 Federal Register dated April 10, 1993 (58 FR 18392). Draft EISs ERP No. D-COE-D23000-VA Rating EU3, Southeastern Public Service Authority of Virginia Regional Landfill Expansion Project, COE Section 404 Permit Issuance, Cities of Chesapeake, Norfolk, Portsmouth, Suffolk, and Virginia Beach, Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties, VA. Summary: EPA determined that the proposed action was environmentally unsatisfactory due to adverse impacts to 377 acres of forested wetlands, rare and endangered species and overall biodiversity at the Dismal Swamp Expansion Site. In addition, EPA judged the EIS to be inadequate for failing to consider the full range of project alternatives. EPA requested that a revised draft EIS be issued to explore less damaging alternative sites. ERP No. DS-AFS-K61103-CA Rating E02, Bear Mountain Ski Resort Expansion, (formerly) known as Goldmine) Additional Information, San Bernardino National Forest, Special-Use-Permit and Possible COE Section 404 Permit, San Bernardino County, CA. Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections because of the potential implications of allowing extensive developments in known California spotted owl and San Bernardino flying squirrel habitat in exchange for acquisition of high-quality off-site habitat. EPA also objected to potential cumulative impacts to air quality, groundwater overdraft, solid waste generation and visual impacts. EPA believed that many impacts can be avoided or reduced by downsizing the project. ERP No. DS-SFW-A64056-00 Rating LO, Federal Aid in Sports Fish and Wildlife Restoration Programs, Operation and Management, Programmatic EIS, Updated Information, Implementation and Funding. Summary: EPA had no objections to be preferred alternative. Final EISs ERP No. F-AFS-K53005-AZ, Grand Canyon Airport to Maswik Transportation Area, Grand Canyon Village Passenger Rail Service Construction and Operation, Approval and Special Use Permit, Coconino County, AZ. Summary: Review of the Final EIS was not deemed necessary. No comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. Other ERP No. LD-AFS-L652200-OR Rating LO, Wallowa River National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, Designation, Umatilla National Forests, Union and Wallowa Counties, OR. Summary: EPA had no objections to the proposed action. Dated: February 8, 1994. Marshall Cain, Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. 94-3303 Filed 2-10-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P-M --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-3303. Public record. Not legal advice.