[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 68 (Friday, April 8, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-8495]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: April 8, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-4710-2]

 

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of 
EPA Comments

    Availability of EPA comments prepared March 21, 1994 Through March 
25, 1994 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.

Summary of Rating Definitions

Environmental Impact of the Action

LO--Lack of Objections
    The EPA review has not identified any potential environmental 
impacts requiring substantive changes to the proposal. The review may 
have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures 
that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the 
proposal.
EC--Environmental Concerns
    The EPA review has identified environmental impacts that should be 
avoided in order to fully protect the environment. Corrective measures 
may require changes to the preferred alternative or application of 
mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact. EPA would 
like to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts.
EU--Environmental Objections
    The EPA review has identified significant environmental impacts 
that must be avoided in order to provide adequate protection for the 
environment. Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the 
preferred alternative or consideration of some other project 
alternative (including the no action alternative or a new alternative). 
EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts.
EO--Environmentally Unsatisfactory
    The EPA review has identified adverse environmental impacts that 
are of sufficient magnitude that they are unsatisfactory from the 
standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality. EPA 
intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. If the 
potentially unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected at the final EIS 
stage, this proposal will be recommended for referral to the CEQ.

Adequacy of the Impact Statement

Category 1--Adequate

    EPA believes the draft EIS adequately sets forth the environmental 
impact(s) of the preferred alternative and those of the alternatives 
reasonably available to the project or action. No further analysis or 
data collection is necessary, but the reviewer may suggest the addition 
of clarifying language or information.

Category 2--Insufficient Information

    The draft EIS does not contain sufficient information for EPA to 
fully assess environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to 
fully protect the environment, or the EPA reviewer has identified new 
reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of 
alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the 
environmental impacts of the action. The identified additional 
information, data, analyses, or discussion should be included in the 
final EIS.

Category 3--Inadequate

    EPA does not believe that the draft EIS adequately assesses 
potentially significant environmental impacts of the action, or the EPA 
reviewer has identified new, reasonably available alternatives that are 
outside of the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, 
which should be analyzed in order to reduce the potentially significant 
environmental impacts. EPA believes that the identified additional 
information, data, analyses, or discussions are of such a magnitude 
that they should have full public review at a draft stage. EPA does not 
believe that the draft EIS is adequate for the purposes of the NEPA 
and/or Section 309 review, and thus should be formally revised and made 
available for public comment in a supplemental or revised draft EIS. On 
the basis of the potential significant impacts involved, this proposal 
could be a candidate for referral to the CEQ.

DRAFT EISs

    ERP No. D-AFS-E65043-00 Rating EC2, Red-Cockaded Woodpecker (RCW) 
(Picoides borealis) Repopulation, Habitat Management Areas, 
Implementation, National Forests in the Southern Region.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding impacts due 
to oil and gas seismic exploration. EPA recommended more stringent 
restriction on oil and gas exploration and encouraged uneven-aged 
timber harvesting instead of even-aged cutting, as a mean to preserve 
habitat diversity.
    ERP No. D-CGD-K50010-CA Rating EC2, Ford Bridge (Known as Henry 
Ford (Badger Avenue) Railroad Bridge) Replacement Project, 
Implementation, across the Cerritos Channel of Los Angeles and Long 
Beach Harbor, Approval of Permits, Los Angeles County, CA.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the 
project's potential air quality impacts and the possibility that 
sediments proposed for dredging may contain elevated DDT levels. EPA 
requested clarification of these issues in the final EIS.
    ERP No. D-COE-L39050-WA Rating EC2, Southwest Harbor Cleanup and 
Redevelopment Project, Construction, NPDES Permit, from SW Spokane 
Street to Elliott Bay and from Harbor Avenue SW to the West Waterway, 
Port of Seattle, King County, WA.
    Summary: EPA had environmental concerns due to the lack of 
information on contamination at the Wyckoff property and lack of Clean 
Air Act conformity determination.
    ERP No. D-IBR-K39049-CA Rating EC2, Coachella Canal Lining Water 
Project, Construction, Operation and Funding, Riverside and Imperial 
Counties, CA.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the 
mitigation plan and requested additional information on supply and 
quality of mitigation water.
    ERP No. D-SFW-F60005-IN Rating LO1, Patoka River Wetlands Project, 
Land Acquisition for Fish and Wildlife Protection and Management, 
Funding and Section 404 Permit, Gibson and Pike Counties, IN.
    Summary: EPA had no objections to the proposed project.
    ERP No. D-USA-K11051-CA Rating EC2, Sacramento Army Depot Disposal 
and Reuse, Implementation, Sacramento, El Dorado, Placer and Yolo 
Counties, CA.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the lack of 
a comprehensive analysis of cumulative impacts and Clean Air Act 
conformity requirement. Clarification of these issues was requested.
    ERP No. DC-NOA-K90007-00 Rating LO1, Pacific Coast Groundfish 
Fishery Management Plan, Amendment No. 8, Fixed Gear Sablefish 
Individual Quotas Program, Approval and Implementation, off the Coast 
of WA, OR and CA.
    Summary: EPA had no objections with the proposed action.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-BOP-D80022-PA, Philadelphia, PA. Metropolitan Detention 
Center (MDC), Construction and Operation, City of Philadelphia, PA.
    Summary: EPA had no objections to the proposed action.
    ERP No. F-FAA-C51015-NJ, Newark International Airport Installation 
and Operation of an Instrument Landing System on Runway 11, Funding and 
Airport Layout Plan Approval, Essex and Union Counties, NJ.
    Summary: EPA had no objection to the proposed project.
    ERP No. F-UAF-E11032-FL, Homestead Air Force Base (AFB) Disposal 
and Reuse, Implementation, Dade County, FL.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the air 
quality analysis and requested additional clarification.
    ERP No. FA-COE-E36013-MS, Mississippi River and Tributaries Flood 
Control Plan, Updated Information, Yazoo Projects, Yazoo River Basin, 
several counties, MS.
    Summary: EPA continued to have environmental concerns regarding the 
sufficiency and success of the proposed mitigation. Verification will 
only be determined during the subsequent monitoring effort and any 
shortcomings will need to be rectified.


    Dated: April 5, 1994.
Marshall Cain,
Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 94-8495 Filed 4-7-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U