Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-5475-4]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared November 04, 1996 Through

November 08, 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 05, 1996 (61

FR 15251).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-BLM-K67037-NV Rating EO2, Twin Creeks Mine Consolidation

and Expansion, which encompasses the former Rabbit Creek Mine and the

former Chimney Creek Mine, Plan of Operation and Permit Application

Approval, Winnemucca District, Humboldt County, NV.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections due to potential

impacts to water quality/quantity, biological resources, including

impacts associated with groundwater drawdown from pit dewatering; as

well as the project's potential risks related to geologic hazards. EPA

also requested additional information regarding these issues, as well

as mitigation measures, geochemical characterization, reclamation, and

ecological risk assessment.

ERP No. D-NPS-K61212-CA Rating EC2, San Francisco Maritime National

Historical Park, General Management Plan, Implementation, San Francisco

County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding water

quality and erosion control, hazardous

[[Page 60703]]

materials, and construction activities. EPA requested additional

information on these issues be included in the Final EIS.

ERP No. D-NPS-K65187-CA Rating EC2, Santa Rosa Island Resources

Management Plan, Improvements of Water Quality and Conservation of Rare

Species and their Habitats, Channel Islands National Park, Santa

Barbara County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns with potential

impacts associated with the weed and road management programs. EPA

requested that the FEIS demonstrate consistency with the applicable

Basin Plan, and encouraged Park Service to modify the preferred

alternative to include more environmental protection features found in

the Conservation Team Recommendations Alternative.

Regulations

ERP No. RR-DOA-A90083-00, 7 CFR Part 12--Highly Erodible Land and

Wetland Conservation.

Summary: EPA commented that the interim final rule raised a number

of issues that may affect implementation of the Clean Water Action

Section 404 regulatory program. Rather than proposing specific

revisions to the regulations regarding the Swampbuster program. EPA

recommended that issues be addressed, where possible, through the

development of a formal interagency agreement between EPA, NRCS, the

Corps of Engineers and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. EPA also

recommended that the final rule clarify the Swampbuster status of

prior-converted cropland when wetland characteristics return as a

result of a lack of maintenance of the land or other circumstances

beyond the control of the property owner. EPA raised concerns over the

adequacy of the Environmental Assessment (EA) and recommended that the

EA be revised prior to publication of the final rule.

ERP No. R-DOA-A99214-00, 7 CFR Part 1466--Environmental Quality

Incentives Program--Commodity Credit Corporation.

Summary: EPA supported the proposed approach for designating

priority areas, and recommended establishing a financial incentive

program for states to develop priority areas that effectively direct

funds to critical environmental resource problems, and that the

Commodity Credit Corporation reject these proposals that do not meet

the relevant criteria. EPA also recommended that in defining a ``large

confined livestock operation,'' the final rule should emphasize that

assistance is meant for family farmers and ranchers and that a specific

level for defining large operations be established, allowing for

exceptions based upon ability to pay and on maximizing environmental

benefits per dollar.

Dated: November 25, 1996.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 96-30496 Filed 11-27-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P