[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 72 (Friday, April 12, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16249-16250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9161]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-5415-5]


Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of 
EPA Comments

    Availability of EPA comments prepared March 25, 1996 through March 
29, 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-K61139-CA Trinity Alps Wilderness Plan, 
Implementation, Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Klamath National Forest 
and Six Rivers National Forest, Humboldt, Siskiyou and Trinity 
Counties, CA.
    Summary: Due to the federal furlough of December 18, 1995 through 
January 5, 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency did not review the 
EIS.
    ERP No. D-DOE-G09801-NM Rating LO, Medical Isotopes Production 
Project (MIPP), Establish and Produce a Continuous Supply of 
Molybdenum-99 and Related Isotopes, Bernalillo County, NM.
    Summary: EPA had no objections to the selection of the preferred 
alternative.
    ERP No. D-FHW-E40355-FL Rating EC2, Miami Intermodal Center (MIC), 
Construction, Bounded by FL-112 on the north, FL-836 on the south, 
Miami International Airport landside terminal NW 27th Avenue on the 
east, along FL-836 that extends West to NW 57th Avenue, Dade County, 
FL.
    Summary: EPA's review found that the document adequately addressed 
most projected impacts the human environment. Additional information 
was requested on the air quality analysis and mitigation of impacts.
    ERP No. D-FHW-E40766-TN Rating EO2, TN 840 North from I-40 East 
near Lebanon in Wilson County to I-40 West in Dickson County, 
Construction, COE Section 404 and CGD Permits, Wilson, Dickson, Sumner, 
Robertson, Montgomery and Cheatham Counties, TN.
    Summary: EPA's review found that the proposed project could have 
significant direct and induced impacts of forest and water resources. 
Specific information for potential mitigation of impacts is lacking and 
should be included in the final EIS.
    ERP No. DS-FHW-D40242-VA Rating EU2, Southeastern Expressway 
Improvements, I-464/I-64 to VA-44 (Norfolk-Virginia Beach Expressway), 
Updated Information concerning Alternatives Under Consideration, 
Funding , COE Section 10 and 40 Permits and US Coast Guard Bridge 
Permit, Cities of Chesapeake and Virginia Beach, York and James City 
Co., VA.
    Summary: EPA finds the potential significant impacts of the 
candidate build alternatives to wetland (319-406 acres) and important 
terrestrail (300-400 acres) habitats unsatisfactory. Additionally, the 
inability of the project to meet its stated purpose and need (primarily 
to relieve traffic congestion); its failure to meet a project 
commitment of implementation of a true multi-modal transportation 
project; and potential impacts on the Federally threatened Dismal Swamp 
shrew are unsatisfactory. The document also failed to commit to a 
mitigation plan which would adequately compensate for direct and 
indirect project impacts.
    ERP No. DS-FTA-C51014-NJ Rating LO, Hudson River Waterfront 
Transportation Corridor Improvements, (officially now referred to as 
Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System), Funding, Jersey City, Hudson 
and Bergen Counties, NJ.
    Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in 
significant adverse environmental impacts; therefore, EPA had no 
objection to its implementation.
    ERP No. D1-FTA-C51014-NJ Rating EC2, Hudson-Bergen Light Rail 
Transit System, Bayonne Extension, Improvements, Funding, Hudson and 
Bergen Counties, NJ.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential 
impacts to wetlands and water quality. Accordingly, EPA has requested 
that additional information be provided in the final EIS to address 
these issues.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-AFS-A65161-00 Gypsy Moth Management in the United States: 
A Cooperative Approach, Implementation, US.
    Summary: EPA had no objections to the preferred alternative as 
described in the final EIS.
    ERP No. F-AFS-K65164-00 Southwestern Region Amendment of Forest 
Plans, Implementation, Standard and Guidelines for Northern Goshawk and 
Mexican Spotted Owl, AZ and NM.
    Summary: Review of the Final EIS was not deemed necessary. No 
formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
    ERP No. F-BOP-C81015-NY New York Federal Detention Center, 
Construction and Operation, Possible Site Selection, Alboin Site and 
Batavia Site, NY.
    Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in 
significant adverse environmental

[[Page 16250]]

impacts, therefore, EPA had no objection to its implementation.
    ERP No. F-FTA-C40133-PR Tren Urbano Transit Project, Improvement, 
San Juan Metropolitan Area, Funding, NPDES Permit, US Coast Guard 
Bridge Permit and COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, PR.
    Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in 
significant adverse environmental impacts; therefore, EPA had no 
objection to its implementation.

    Dated: April 9, 1996.
William D. Dickerson,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 96-9161 Filed 4-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P