[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49738-49739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-24287]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration


Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: City of 
Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration, DOT.

[[Page 49739]]


ACTION: Notice of Intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is issuing this 
notice to advise the public of its intent to prepare a supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in cooperation with the Virginia 
Department of Transportation (VDOT) to more thoroughly examine the 
impacts associated with the selected bypass alternative (Alternative 
10) from the Route 29 Corridor Study final EIS and the subsequent 
changes to the termini on the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir and 
archeological resources not previously accounted for.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Sundra, Senior Environmental 
Specialist, Federal Highway Administration, Post Office Box 10249, 
Richmond, Virginia 23240-0249, Telephone 804-775-3338.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the late-1980s, an EIS was initiated to 
address congestion on Route 29 through the City of Charlottesville and 
Albemarle County in central Virginia. In 1993, a Record of Decision 
(ROD) was issued by FHWA which identified a series of improvements to 
address the project's purpose and need. This series of improvements 
included a bypass alternative known as Alternative 10 located west of 
existing Route 29. Shortly after issuing the ROD, changes were 
requested by the localities to the termini of the bypass. To address 
these changes, an Environmental Assessment was prepared which concluded 
that a supplemental EIS was not required. In 1996, a Reevaluation was 
initiated to address design changes to the bypass recommended by a 
local design advisory committee as well as other issues that arose 
since the EA. In 1998, litigation was brought against the project by 
the Southern Environmental Law Center on behalf of the Piedmont 
Environmental Council and Sierra Club alleging violations of the 
National Environmental Policy Act and section 4(f) of the U.S. 
Department of Transportation Act of 1966. On March 13, 2000, FHWA 
completed its Reevaluation and issued a revised ROD documenting the 
changes to the selected alternative and the mitigation for the bypass. 
In August of 2001, a judge for the United States District Court in the 
City of Charlottesville rendered his decision on the litigation 
granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in part. As a 
result, the Court enjoined further action on the project until a 
supplemental EIS was completed which addressed the issues enumerated in 
the judge's memorandum opinion--impacts to the South Fork Rivanna River 
Reservoir and archeological resources which had not been previously 
considered. On the other eight counts raised by the plaintiffs, the 
judge granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment concluding 
that FHWA adequately considered the issues raised by the plaintiffs in 
the NEPA process and were not arbitrary and capricious in rendering its 
decision. Therefore, this supplemental EIS will be of limited scope 
with the purpose of determining whether the FHWA decision for the 
selected alternative represented by the revised ROD dated March 13, 
2001, remains reasonable once the impacts of the bypass on the South 
Fork Rivanna River Reservoir and archeological resources not currently 
accounted for are thoroughly examined and considered.
    In accordance with 40 CFR 1502.9(c)(4), scoping will not be 
reinitiated for the project. To support the development of the 
supplemental EIS, local officials and State and Federal agencies will 
be coordinated with as necessary, given the limited scope of the 
supplemental EIS. Letters describing the proposed study and soliciting 
input will be sent to the appropriate agencies which are known to have 
an interest or legal role in the project. Once completed, copies of the 
supplemental EIS will be sent to all recipients of the final EIS for 
the Route 29 Corridor Study. A public hearing is planned where the 
draft supplemental EIS will be made available to the public for review 
and comment prior to and after the hearing. Notices of the public 
hearing will be given through various forums, including the newspaper, 
providing the time and place of the meeting along with other relevant 
information. Any comments that are received during the public comment 
period that address the issues for which the supplemental EIS is being 
prepared will be considered before FHWA renders its decision regarding 
the existing selected alternative. Any comments that are received which 
address issues which the Court has already determined have been 
adequately addressed will be reviewed but not considered unless they 
raise significant new information.
    Comments and questions concerning the development of the 
supplemental EIS and its scope should be directed to FHWA at the 
address provided above. Preparation of this supplemental EIS does not 
require the withdrawal of any previous approvals or documents.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing 
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on 
Federal programs and activities apply to this proposed action.)

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48.

    Issued on: September 14, 2001.
Edward S. Sundra,
Senior Environmental Specialist.
[FR Doc. 01-24287 Filed 9-27-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-M