Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-4723-8]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared May 1, 1995 through May 5,

1995 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 FR dated April 14, 1995 (72

FR 19047).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-BLM-J65229-MT

Rating EC2, Sweet Grass Hills Resource Management Plan Amendment,

Implementation, West HiLine Resource Management Plan, Toole and Liberty

Counties, MT.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential

impacts to water resources wildlife resources, air quality and cultural

resources which should be avoided in order to fully protect the

environment. EPA requested that additional information regarding these

issues be included in the final document.

ERP No. D-DOE-L05210-00

Rating EO2, Resource Contingency Program, Construction and

Operation, Three Proposed Plant Sites, Chelalis Hermiston and Satsop

Power Projects, Lewis and Grays Harbor Counties, WA and Washington and

Umattilla Counties, OR.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections based on potential

water quality and wetland impacts. EPA requested additional information

concerning the alternatives for potential cumulative impacts and

proposed mitigation and monitoring.

ERP No. D1-DOE-A00163-00

Rating EC2, Programmatic EIS-Tritium Supply and Recycling

Facilities Siting, Construction and Operation, Implementation, Idaho

National Engineering Laboratory, ID; Nevada Test Site, NV; Oak Ridge

Reservation, TN; Pantex Plant, TX or Savannah River Site, SC.

Summary: EPA endorsed the accelerator technology as the most

environmentally preferred technology and noted that each site has a

unique set of environmental challenges to mitigate. EPA requested

additional information in the final EIS concerning groundwater, aquifer

impacts, and emergency preparedness.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-DOD-K11057-CA

California Acoustic Thermometry of Ocean Climate (ATOC) Program and

Marine Mammal Research Program (MMRP), Funding, Marine Mammal Research

Permit and COE Nationwide Permits Issuance, Monterey County, CA.

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

comment letter was sent to the preparing Agency.

ERP No. F-DOE-A00166-00

NAT, Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National

Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management

Programs, Implementation.

Summary: EPA environmental concerns on the draft environmental

impact statement have been adequately addressed.

ERP No. F-NPS-K61130-HI

Haleakala National Park General Management Plan and Conceptual

Framework, Implementation, Island of Maui, Maui County, HI.

[[Page 30537]]

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

comment letter was sent to the preparing Agency.

Dated: June 6, 1995.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 95-14224 Filed 6-8-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U