[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 198 (Friday, October 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52130-52131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-25715]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6622-7]


Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of 
EPA Comments

    Availability of EPA comments prepared 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.
    An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental 
impact statements (EISs) was published in FR dated May 18, 2001 (97 FR 
27647).

Draft EISs

    ERP No. D-DOE-L08055-WA Rating EO2, Kangley--Echo Lake Transmission

[[Page 52131]]

Line Project, Construct a New 500-kilovolt (kV) Transmission Line, COE 
Section 10 and 404 Permits, (DOE/EIS-0317), King County, WA.

Summary

    EPA expressed objections regarding the project's potential impacts 
to the Cedar River watershed and to endangered species. EPA requested 
that the final EIS provide information to fully evaluate these impacts, 
that it consider a broader range of alternatives, and that it discuss 
compliance with the Clean Water Act's antidegradation requirement.
    ERP No. D-DOE-L09815-00 Rating LO, Fish and Wildlife Implementation 
Plan, To Implement and Fund a Policy Directions for Fish and Wildlife 
Mitigation and Recovery, Pacific Northwest, AZ, CA, ID, MT, NV, NM, OR, 
UT, WY and British Columbia.

Summary

    EPA has no objections to the draft EIS. It provides a framework for 
deciding policy directions, rather than describing the impacts of a 
particular action or set of actions that will result from the document. 
Agencies with jurisdiction in the Columbia River Basin will, however, 
have to individually address Fish and Wildlife recovery plans in stand 
alone NEPA documents in order to comply with the 2000 Biological 
Opinion for the Federal Columbia River Power System.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-FHW-H59000-NB, Antelope Valley Study, Implementation of 
Stormwater Management, Transportation Improvements and Community 
Revitalization, Major Investment Study, City of Lincoln, Lancaster 
County, NB.

Summary

    No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
    ERP No. F-USA-D11031-MD, Fort George G. Meade Future Development 
and Operations of a New Administrative and Support Buildings, Anne 
Arundel and Howard Counties, MD.

Summary

    No formal comment letter was sent to preparing agency.
    ERP No. FS-JUS-G11010-00, Programmatic--Final Supplemental EIS US 
Naturalization Service (INS) and US Joint Task Force-Six (JTF-6) 
Activities Along the US/Mexico Border from Brownsville Texas to San 
Diego, California.

Summary

    EPA offered additional comments on the Final Programmatic EIS to 
strengthen the NEPA document. EPA asked that its concerns be addressed 
in the Record of Decision Document or in any subsequent NEPA documents 
that are tiered to the Programmatic EIS.

    Dated: October 9, 2001.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 01-25715 Filed 10-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P