Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-5230-4]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared October 16, 1995 Through

October 20, 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-SCS-K36113-HI Rating EO2, Lower Hamakua Ditch Watershed,

Agricultural Water Management Plan, Funding and COE Section 404 Permit

Issuance, Hawaii County, HI.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental objection with the project's

potential impacts to groundwater and fish and wildlife. EPA requested

that these issues be more fully discussed in the final EIS.

ERP No. D-TVA-E09801-00 Rating EC2, Programmatic EIS--Energy Vision

2020, Integrated Resource Plan, Implementation of Long-Term Plan and

Short-Term Action, TN, AL, KY, GA, MS, NC and VA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concern regarding potential

long term impacts because of the uncertainty of predicting energy

sources and impacts through the year 2020 and has requested some

additional information.

ERP No. D-USN-K11064-CA Rating EC2, Mare Island Naval Shipyard

Disposal and Reuse, Implementation, City of Valley, Solano County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding wetlands

dredging, submerged hazardous waste, air quality information, and

cumulative impacts.

ERP No. DS-COE-K36100-CA Rating EU2, American River Watershed Flood

Plain Protection Project, Construction, Operation and Maintenance,

Updated and Additional Information, Sacramento, Placer and Sutter

Counties, CA.

Summary: EPA believed that the Dry Detention Dam alternative is

environmentally unsatisfactory due to significant unacceptable impacts

to water quality and unique natural resources. The other alternatives

are less damaging and appear to be practicable. While these two

alternatives may cause degradation to sensitive habitats and fisheries,

mitigation measures are available.

ERP No. DS-NIH-D81023-MD Rating LO, National Institutes of Health

Bethesda Main Campus Comprehensive Master Plan, Implementation,

Montgomery County, MD.

Summary: EPA had no objection to the action as proposed.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-COE-K36111-CA Santa Paula Creek Flood Control Project,

Improvements, Ventura County, CA.

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

formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. F-DOE-E22000-SC

Savannah River Site Waste Management Facilities, Implementation,

Aiken, Allendale and Barnwell Counties, SC.

Summary: EPA comments on the draft EIS were adequately addressed in

the final document.

ERP No. F-USN-K11028-CA Long Beach Naval Hospital Base Disposal and

Reuse, Implementation and NPDES Permit, City of Long Beach, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concern over the selection of

the Retail Alternative due to its implications on the South Coast Air

Quality Management District's SIP attainment.

Dated: October 30, 1995

B. Katherine Biggs,

Associate Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal

Activities.

[FR Doc. 95-27352 Filed 11-2-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U