Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-4724-1]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared May 08, 1995 Through May 12,

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 (60

FR 19047).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-BLM-J65226-WY Rating EC2, Grass Creek Resource Management

Plan, Implementation, Big Horn, Washakie, Hot Springs and Park

Counties, WY.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the range of

alternatives, cumulative impacts, water quality and ecosystem impacts.

EPA requested that additional clarification be provided in the final

document on these issues.

ERP No. D-FHW-L40194-WA Rating LO, WA-3/WA-304 Bremerton Ferry

Terminal to the vicinity of Gorst Highway Improvement Project,

Implementation, Funding, Right-of-Way Grant, NPDES Permit and COE

Section 404 Permit, City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, WA.

Summary: EPA used a regional screening process to conduct a limited

[[Page 31716]]

review of the draft document. Based upon this limited screen, EPA has

not identified any significant issues.

ERP No. D-FRC-L05209-WA Rating LO, Nisqually Hydroelectric Project

(FERC. No. 1862) Issuing New License (Relicense), Nisqually River,

Pierce, Thurston and Lewis Counties, WA.

Summary: EPA review found no issues of concern that relate to EPA's

responsibilities. Therefore EPA had no objection to the action as

proposed.

ERP No. D-FTA-C40133-PR Rating EC2, Tren Urbano Transit Project,

Improvement, San Juan Metropolitan Area, Funding, NPDES Permit, U.S.

Coast Guard Bridge Permit and COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, PR.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the proposed

project's potential impacts to wetlands, ground water, and historically

significant resources. Additionally, EPA requested that further

analysis be conducted with regard to air conformity requirements.

ERP No. D-GSA-L40195-WA Rating LO, Pacific Highway Port of Entry

(POE) Facility Expansion, Construction of WA-543 in Blaine, near the

United States/Canada Border in Blaine, Whatcom County, WA.

Summary: EPA has not identified any significant statutory or

jurisdictional issues of concern.

ERP No. D-USA-K11059-CA Rating EC2, Hamilton Army Airfield Disposal

and Reuse, Implementation, City of Novato, Marin County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns that air quality was

not adequately considered; that deed restrictions and mitigation

measures were not clearly stated; that wetlands and natural resource

issues were not explained sufficiently; and that Scenario E (open

space) requires further explanation to ensure adequate protection of

habitat and specie.

ERP No. DB-COE-E36013-MS Rating EC2, Mississippi River and

Tributaries Flood Control Plan, Big Sunflower River Maintenance

Project, Yazoo Basin, Sunflower, Washington, Humphreys, Sharkey and

Yazoo Counties, MS.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns of potential adverse

consequences associated with channelizing over 100 miles of streams in

the Big Sunflower watershed. EPA requested additional information

before a decision is made on the project's feasibility.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-FHW-C40100-NY I-26 Mohawk River Crossing connecting NYS

Thruway Interchange 26, I-890, NYS-5S and NYS-5 Construction, Funding,

U.S. Coast Guard Permits and COE Section 404 Permit, Towns of Rotterdam

and Glenville, Schenectady County, NY.

Summary: EPA believed that the implementation of the proposed

project will not have an adverse effect on the environment; and

therefore, does not object to its implementation.

Other

ERP No. LD-AFS-L61200-ID Rating LO, North Fork of the Clearwater

River Drainage, Kelly Creek and Cayuse Creek, Wild and Scenic River

Study, Suitability or Nonsuitability for Designation or Nondesignation

in the National Wild and Scenic River System, Clearwater National

Forest, Clearwater and Idaho Counties, ID.

Summary: EPA regional screening process identified no significant

statutory or jurisdictional issues of concern, thus EPA had no

objection to the action.

Dated: June 13, 1995.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 95-14821 Filed 6-15-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U