Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-5489-2]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of

EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared February 02, 1998 Through

February 06, 1998 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 Offices 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 11, 1997 (62

FR 16154).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-BLM-J39027-CO Rating EC2, Plateau Creek Pipeline

Replacement Project, Operation and Maintenance, Ute Water Conservancy

District, Right-of-Way Permit, Mesa County, CO.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential

impacts to wetlands and requested the purpose and need include future

water needs.

ERP No. D-FRC-B03008-00 Rating EO2, Portland Natural Gas

Transmission System Project (PNGTS) and (PNGTS)/Maritimes & Northeast

Pipeline L.L.C., Phase II Joint Facilities Project, Construction and

Operation, COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, MA, York and Cumberland

Counties, ME, Coos County, NH and Essex County, VT.

Summary: EPA commented that the scope of the environmental review

may have been to limited, resulting in a potentially segmented review

of related and/or interconnected projects. EPA requested additional

information with regard to wetlands, drinking water, groundwater supply

and secondary impacts in order to fully evaluate the environmental

impacts of the proposed project.

ERP No. D-STB-A53053-00 Rating EC2, Conrail Acquisition (Finance

Docket No. 33388) by CSX Corporation and CSX Transportation Inc., and

Norfolk Southern Corporation and Norfolk Southern Railway Company

[[Page 8635]]

(NS), Control and Operating Leases and Agreements, To serve portion of

eastern United States.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns for the project's

potential impact to air quality and requested additional information

regarding the noise analysis and mitigation for communities identified

by-the STB's environmental justice review.

ERP No. DS-APH-A82124-00 Rating EO2, Logs, Lumber and Other

Unmanufactured Wood Articles Importation, Additional Updated

Information, Improvements to the existing system to Prohibit

Introduction of Plant Pests into the United States.

Summary: EPA had environmental objections to the proposed project

and requested additional information. The objections focused on the

adequacy of analysis for assessing risk and consequences of pest

introduction, compliance of regulations by exporters, human health

effects of the program, and the comparison of alternatives. EPA also

had concerns about the use of methyl bromide in the program.

ERP No. DS-NOA-L91001-AK Rating EC2, Juneau Consolidated Facility,

Additional Information, Space for the University of Alaska Fairbanks

School of Fisheries and Ocean Science (UAF), Possible Site Lena Point,

Fisheries Management Operation, ``Vision for 2005'', Juneau, AK.

Summary: EPA still has environmental concerns regarding water

quality/groundwater, noise, wastewater treatment, and mitigation

measures. Clarification of these issues was requested.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-AFS-J65261-MT, Beaverhead Forest Plan Riparian Amendment,

Implementation, Beaverhead--Deerlodge National Forest, Beaverhead,

Madison, Silver Bow, Deer Lodge and Gallatin Counties, MT.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the

anticipated slow rate of improvement or restoration of existing

degraded riparian areas with the preferred alternative. EPA recommended

more timely attainment of proper functioning condition and desired

future condition, and recommended inclusion of water quality protection

language in the objectives.

ERP No. F-IBR-J64006-ND, Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge,

Implementation, Water Management Capability to Mitigate for Past,

Present and Future Impacts of Jamestown Reservoir, Stutsman and Foster

Counties, ND.

Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns over potential water

quality impacts, and recommended that downstream water quality should

be monitored and an adaptive operations plan be developed to ensure

that water quality standards are met.

Dated: February 17, 1998.

B. Katherine Biggs,

Associate Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal

Activities.

[FR Doc. 98-4369 Filed 2-19-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U