Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments
Federal RegisterJul 19, 1996
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-5471-5]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared July 1, 1996 Through July 5,
1996 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)
564-7167. An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental
impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated April 5, 1996 (61 FR
15251).
Draft EISs
ERP No. D-AFS-K65184-CA Rating EC2, Rock Creek Recreational Trails
Management Plan, Implementation, Eldorado National Forest, Georgetown
Ranger District, Eldorado County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential noise
impacts, the proposed level of use, funding feasibility, and the
integration of management on intermixed private lands. EPA recommended
reconsideration of the level of participation, number of special events
allowed and the ability to enforce road/trail closures with an all-
season road.
ERP No. D-AFS-L61208-00 Rating EC2, Hells Canyon National
Recreation Area (HCNRA), Comprehensive Management Plan, Implementation,
Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, Nez Perce and Payette National
Forests, Bake and Wallowa Counties, OR and Nez Perce and Adam Counties,
ID.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns based on potential
adverse impacts of the action from roads, grazing and increased usage
to air quality, riparian habitat and water quality.
ERP No. D-AFS-L65266-AK Rating EC2, King George Timber Sale
Project, Timber Harvesting and Road Construction, Implementation,
Tongass National Forest, Stikine Area, Etolin Island, AK.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about road closure
methods, water quality, wildlife habitat, especially fish habitat and
suggested the final EIS include this information.
ERP No. D-BLM-K67035-NV Rating EC2, Bootstrap/Capstone and Tara
Open-Pit Gold Mine Project, Construction and Operation Approval, Plan
of Operation, Elko and Eureka Counties, NV.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns due to potential
impacts to water quality and suggested that complete or partial
backfilling of the Bootstrap/Capstone pit be included in the preferred
alternative. The FEIS should further address impacts to water and air
quality, wildlife, and wetlands; as well as cumulative impacts;
mitigation; and waste rock characterization and handling.
ERP No. D-DOE-K11068-NV Rating EO2, Nevada Test Site (NTS) and Off-
Site Locations, Implementation, at the Following Sites: Tonopah Test
Range; Portions of the Nellis Air Force Range (NAFR) Complex; the
Central Nevada Test Area and Shoal Area Project, Nye County, NV.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections due to a lack of
mitigation to offset or reduce potential adverse impacts; a tendency to
locate the proposed facilities in undisturbed rather than already-
disturbed areas; and a lack of pollution prevention features.
ERP No. DS-AFS-L65201-OR Rating LO, Eagle Creek Timber Sale and
Road Construction, Additional and Updated Information, Implementation,
Mt. Hood
[[Page 37742]]
National Forest, Zigzag and Estacada Ranger District, Clackama County,
OR.
Summary: Our abbreviated review has revealed no EPA concerns on
this project.
Final EISs
ERP No. F-AFS-K61136-00 Heavenly Ski Resort Master Plan,
Improvement, Expansion and Management, Lake Tahoe Basin Management
Unit, Special-Use-Permit, Douglas County, NV and El Dorado and Alpine
Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA continued to express environmental objections to this
expansion based on air quality, noise, traffic, fish and wildlife, and
visual/scenic features as a result of past construction and current
operation of Heavenly Ski Resort If the proposed level of development
is approved, we strongly recommended that the Record of Decision (ROD)
clearly commit to: a subsequent environmental review and cumulative
watershed effects analysis, an if the analysis shows continued or
potentially significant adverse environmental impacts, then continued
development will be limited or prohibited.
ERP No. F-BLM-K65158-CA, Clear Creek Management Area, Land and
Resource Management Plan Amendment, Implementation, San Benito and
Fresno Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA registered a Formal protest through BLM's appeal
process because EPA believes that implementing the preferred
alternative would impose the potential for significant adverse impacts
on area users, nearby residents, and BLM employees, and would continue
to significantly and adversely impact environmental resources. Serious
potential impacts include fugitive emissions of asbestos in excess of
Occupational Safety and Health Administration action levels, severe
soil erosion; and sedimentation of several streams in and downstream of
the Clear Creek Management Area, which appears to violate State water
quality objectives for the protection of several designated beneficial
uses.
ERP No. F-COE-K32048-CA, Port of Long Beach (POLB) Main Channel
Deepening and Navigation Improvements, Implementation, Queen's Gate,
San Pedro Bay, Los Angeles 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-NPS-K65171-CA, Cabrillo National Monument, General
Management Plan/Development Concept Plans, Implementation, San Diego
County, CA.
Summary: EPA's environmental concerns have been addressed,
therefore we have no objections to the project as proposed.
ERP No. F1-NAS-A12038-00, International Space Station, Assembly and
Operation, Space Station Freedom (SSF).
Summary: EPA had identified no potentially significant impacts and
continues to lack objections to the proposed project.
Dated: July 16, 1996.
William D. Dickerson,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 96-18420 Filed 7-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.