Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-5482-4]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared June 23, 1997 Through June

27, 1997 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 04, 1997 (62

FR 16154).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-CGD-K50012-CA Rating EC2, A-92/San Mateo Hayward Bridge,

Improvements to the East Approach and the Trestle Portion of the

bridge, Coast Guard Bridge Permit and COE Section 404 Permit, Alameda

and San Mateo Counties, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns with the

alternatives, congestion impacts and CO hotspot analysis presented in

the draft EIS.

ERP No. D-COE-K36121-CA Rating EC2, even Oaks Dam Water

Conservation Feasibility Study, Establishing a Seasonal Water

Conservation and Supply Pool, Flood Control and Flood Protection, Santa

Ana River Basin, San Bernardino County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns because the draft EIS

did not consider ``end of pipe'' water conservation as an alternative

to increasing the dam's water storage and did not sufficiently describe

the proposed project's potential downstream impact.

ERP No. D-COE-L36110-WA Rating LO, Cedar River Section 205 Flood

Damage Reduction Plan, Implementation, Renton, King County, WA.

Summary: EPA had no objection to the preferred alternative as

described in the EIS.

ERP No. D-DOA-E39040-KY Rating LO, City of Albany's Cagle Water

Expansion Project, To expand its Potable Water Treatment Plant, Funding

and COE Section 404 Permit, Clinton and Wayne Counties, KY.

Summary: EPA had no objection to the proposed action.

ERP No. D-USN-E11039-FL Rating EC2, Cecil Field Naval Air Station,

Disposal and Reuse, Implementation, City of Jacksonville, Duval and

Clay Counties, FL.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding hazardous

waste, air quality and noise issues for alternatives other than ARS 1.

EPA had no objection to alternative ARS 1. Additional mitigation and

discussion was requested for the other alternatives.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-DOE-A09824-00 Programmatic EIS--Waste Management,

Managing Treatment, Storage and/or Disposal of Radioactive and

Hazardous Waste for Five Types of Waste: Low-Level Radioactive; Low-

Level Mixed; Transuranic Radioactive; High-Level Radioactive and

Hazardous Waste, Site Selections Around the United States.

Summary: EPA's previous concerns have been resolved, therefore EPA

had no objection with the proposed action.

ERP No. F-FHW-L40179-AK Third Street Widening Project, Improvement,

Old Steese Highway and Hamilton Avenue, Funding and Right-of-Way

Acquisition, Fairbanks North Star Borough, AK.

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

formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. FR-USA-A21035-OR Umatilla Depot Activity, Revision to

Disposal of Chemical Agents and Munitions Stored, Construction and

Operation, Morrow and Umatilla Counties, OR.

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

formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

Dated: July 15, 1997.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 97-19004 Filed 7-17-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U