[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25611-25613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12242]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-5480-3]


Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Final 
Rule for Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental Activities 
in Antarctica

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) for the Final Rule for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of 
Nongovernmental Activities in Antarctica.

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

PURPOSE: The U.S. EPA, in accordance with Section 102(2)(c) of the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), will prepare a Draft EIS for 
the proposed final regulations that will provide for: (1) Environmental 
impact assessment of nongovernmental activities, including tourism, in 
Antarctica for which the United States is required to give advance 
notice under paragraph 5 of Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty of 
1959, and (2) coordination of the review of information regarding 
environmental impact assessments received by the United States from 
other Parties to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the 
Antarctic Treaty. These final regulations will be prepared pursuant to 
the Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996. EPA 
invites comments and suggestions on the scope of the rulemaking and 
analysis including the environmental and regulatory issues to be 
addressed in the EIS.

DATES: Written comments from the public regarding the environmental and 
regulatory issues and alternatives to be addressed in the Draft EIS 
will be accepted by EPA through July 15, 1997. The EPA will also hold a 
public meeting on Tuesday, July 8, 1997, in Washington, DC, 
metropolitan area to receive public input, either verbal or written, on 
relevant environmental and regulatory issues that should be addressed 
in the Draft EIS. The specific location and time of the public meeting 
will be published in the Federal Register at a later date with this 
information mailed directly to those requesting to be on the project 
mailing list.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND TO BE PLACED ON THE PROJECT MAILING LIST 
CONTACT: Mr. Joseph Montgomery or Ms. Katherine Biggs, Office of 
Federal Activities (2252A), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: (202) 564-7157 or (202) 
564-7144, respectively. Copies of the Environmental Assessment, Finding 
of No Significant Impact, and Interim Final Rule discussed in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below may be requested from these 
contacts. These documents are also available on the World Wide Web at: 
http://es.inel.gov/oeca/ofa/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background: Environmental Assessment and Interim Final Rule

    The Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (Act) 
implements the Protocol on Environmental Protection (Protocol) to the 
Antarctic Treaty (Treaty). Pursuant to the Act, the EPA is required to 
promulgate regulations by October 2, 1998, that provide for assessment 
of the environmental impacts of nongovernmental activities, including 
tourism, in Antarctica and for coordination of the review of 
information regarding environmental impact assessments received from 
other Parties to the Protocol. The EPA promulgated an Interim Final 
Rule on April 30, 1998, (Federal Register/Vol. 62, No. 83/Wednesday, 
April 30, 1997/23538-23549) so that the United States would have the 
ability to implement its obligations under the Protocol as soon as the 
Protocol enters into force. The EPA also prepared an ``Environmental 
Assessment of Proposed Interim Rules for Non-Governmental Activity in 
Antarctica'' (EA) to evaluate the environmental and cultural impacts of 
the interim rule. Based on the EA's analysis, EPA issued a Finding of 
No Significant Impact (FNSI) concluding that the promulgation of the 
Interim Final Rule will not have or cause significant impacts on the 
Antarctic environment. The Interim Final Rule: sets forth appropriate 
environmental impact assessment and documentation procedures, including 
documentation regarding planned mitigation and monitoring, if 
appropriate, by tour operators; enhances the collection of data on 
effects and intensity of activities by nongovernmental visitors in 
Antarctica; and reduces the likelihood of inadvertent environmental 
perturbations that may be avoidable.

II. Description of Final Rule to be Developed and the Issues and 
Alternatives to be Considered in the EIS for the Final Rule

    During the time the Interim Final Rule is in place and before the 
October 1998 deadline set by the Act, EPA will

[[Page 25612]]

promulgate a Final Rule that will provide for assessment of 
environmental impacts of nongovernmental activities, including tourism, 
in Antarctica and for coordination of the review of information 
regarding environmental impact assessments received from other Parties 
to the Protocol. In support of this regulatory action, EPA is preparing 
an EIS to consider the environmental and regulatory issues to be 
addressed in the Final Rule and the alternatives for addressing these 
issues within the rule-making process. The alternatives considered by 
EPA in the Draft EIS will include: (1) No Action, i.e., EPA does not 
promulgate a Final Rule; (2) promulgation of the requirements of the 
Interim Final Rule as the Final Rule; and (3) other relevant 
alternatives necessary to address the associated environmental and 
regulatory issues raised by EPA and the public. In developing the Draft 
EIS, EPA will be guided by the statutory requirements of the Act 
including the requirement that ``* * * regulations shall be consistent 
with Annex I to the Protocol'' 16 U.S.C. 2403a(c)(2). The EPA will also 
consider other relevant regulatory provisions and programs such as: the 
enforcement provisions of and authorities under the Antarctic 
Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.; the National Science 
Foundation's (NSF) management of the U.S. Antarctic Program for 
governmental activities, 45 CFR Part 641; the National Environmental 
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 to 4370d, and as referenced in 16 U.S.C. 
2403a(a)(1)(A); the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) 
Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National 
Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, and EPA's Procedures 
for Implementing the Requirements of the Council on Environmental 
Quality on the National Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR Part 6. The 
EPA plans to consider the following issues, along with any other 
relevant alternatives or issues raised by the public, in the Draft EIS:
    (1) Do the time frames of the Interim Final Rule for the submittal 
and review of the environmental documentation need to be changed?
    (2) Should EPA's review criteria more explicitly identify factors 
to assess in determining the environmental impact of proposed actions? 
Article 3 of the Protocol, ``Environmental Principles,'' identifies a 
number of environmental principles for the planning and conduct of 
activities in Antarctica to protect both the Antarctic environment and 
its value for the conduct of science in Antarctica. Can and/or should 
these Principles be more fully integrated into the review criteria to 
ensure that the environmental analysis provides an understanding of the 
extent to which the activity will comport with the provisions of 
Article 3?
    (3) What is the appropriate monitoring regime, if any, that should 
be set out for various types of nongovernmental expeditions? The 
Protocol requires procedures to assess and verify the actual impacts of 
an activity which proceeds on the basis of an initial environmental 
evaluation (IEE) or a comprehensive environmental evaluation (CEE). An 
operator must provide appropriate monitoring of key environmental 
indicators for an activity proceeding on the basis of a CEE; further, 
an operator may also need to carry out monitoring for which an IEE has 
been prepared. The Treaty Parties are still working to identify 
monitoring approaches which can best support the Protocol's 
implementation. Until the Parties agree on such an approach, should the 
procedures provided for in the Interim Final Rule be expanded or remain 
the same?
    (4) Are there other options for streamlining the documentation 
requirements? The Interim Final Rule provides for incorporation of 
materials by reference, consolidation of environmental documentation, 
and waiver of deadlines, options that reduce the burden on the 
regulated parties. What other streamlining options should be 
considered? For example, should there be provisions to allow operators 
to rely on environmental assessment documentation prepared for past 
expeditions in cases where there are no changes proposed relative to 
the proposed expedition(s)? Should there be a provision to allow 
operators to prepare a ``Programmatic'' IEE or CEE? (Drawing on the 
NEPA analogy, a Programmatic EIS is an area-wide or overview EIS to 
address similar activities viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or 
proposed activities that share common timing or geography. A 
Programmatic EIS may serve as a basis for tiering, including 
incorporation by referencing general and relevant specific discussions 
from it into an EIS of a lesser scope).
    (5) What mitigation options should be considered as part of the EIA 
process? Should mitigation be required for certain activities?
    (6) What is the best way to address cumulative impacts? 
Characterization of impacts from single events is direct and relatively 
uncomplicated as compared to characterization of cumulative impacts 
since cumulative impacts involve multiple events over time and often 
result from the effects of more than one source on a single receptor at 
a single point in time.
    (7) Are there activities, or categories of activities, that can be 
excluded from the environmental documentation requirements (e.g., 
Categorical Exclusions)? The CEQ regulations define ``categorical 
exclusion'' as ``a category of actions which do not individually or 
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment * * * 
and for which, therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an 
environmental impact statement is required'' (40 CFR 1508.4).
    (8) Should there be provision for public comment on Initial 
Environmental Evaluations? This is not required by the Protocol. The 
Interim Final Rule provides for posting notice of receipt of IEEs on 
the OFA World Wide Web site and to provide copies to the public upon 
request.
    (9) With regard to the review of environmental documents received 
from other Parties, should the process as delineated in the Interim 
Final Rule be modified?
    (10) Do the paperwork projections in the Interim Final Rule 
accurately reflect the reporting requirements for those subject to the 
Final Rule?

Scoping and Public Comments

    Although the Interim Final Rule was promulgated without public 
notice and comment, the Final Rule and the associated EIS will include 
extensive opportunities for public comment. The EIS process is subject 
to the public participation requirements of the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR parts 1501.7, 1502.19, and 1503) and EPA's 
NEPA implementing regulations (40 CFR part 6, subpart D), and the Final 
Rule will be proposed and promulgated in accordance with the applicable 
provision of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). An 
integral part of the NEPA process is public participation in the 
Scoping process, the key purpose of which is to identify the 
environmental and regulatory issues and alternatives to be addressed in 
the Draft EIS. The public may participate in the initial scoping 
process including the scoping meeting discussed in the DATES section 
above. The public will also have an opportunity to comment on the Draft 
EIS and the proposed Final Rule.

[[Page 25613]]

Estimated Date of Release

    The Draft EIS and proposed Final Rule will be made available in 
January 1998.
Richard E. Sanderson,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 97-12242 Filed 5-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P