[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 8 (Friday, January 11, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1462-1463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-722]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6625-5]


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 (66 FR 27647).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-AFS-J65009-00 Rating LO, Programmatic EIS--Kootena, Idaho 
Panhandle, and Lolo National Forests, Forest Plan Amendments for Access 
Management within the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak Grizzly Bear Recovery 
Zones, ID, WA and MT.
Summary: EPA generally supports the Forest Service's preferred 
alternative for grizzly bear management based on site-specific 
conditions and projects. EPA questions whether resources are sufficient 
to implement the preferred alternatives and road management for water 
quality.
ERP No. D-NPS-K65080-AZ Rating LO, Sunset Crater Volcano National 
Monument, General Management Plan, Implementation, Flagstaff Area, 
Coconina County, AZ.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the Park Service's preferred 
management plans for three National Monuments in the Flagstaff area.
ERP No. D-NPS-K65081-AZ Rating LO, Wupatki National Monument, General 
Management Plan, Implementation, Flagstaff Area, Coconina County, AZ.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the Park Services's preferred 
management plans for three National Monuments in the Flagstaff area.
ERP No. D-NPS-K65082-AZ Rating LO, Walnut Canyon National Monument, 
General Management Plan, Implementation, Flagstaff Area, Coconina 
County, AZ.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the Park Service's preferred 
management plans for three National Monuments in the Flagstaff area.
ERP No. DS-COE-E34030-FL Rating LO, Central and Southern Florida 
Project, Indian River Lagoon-South Feasibility Study, Additional 
Information, Restoration, Protection and Preservation, Canals denoted; 
C-23, C-24, C-25 and C-44, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, 
(CERP), Martin and St. Lucie Counties, FL.
Summary: EPA supports the positive water quality and habitat benefits 
which should result from the proposed IRLS plan.
ERP No. DS-GSA-K81011-CA Rating EC2, Los Angeles Federal Building--U.S. 
Courthouse, Construction of a New Courthouse in the Civic Center, 
Additional Information, City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed continued environmental concerns with the lack 
of information regarding comments GSA received on the DEIS, building 
space requirements, and traffic and air quality impacts.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-FHW-G40163-TX IH-10 West from Taylor Street to FM-1489, 
Construction and Reconstruction,

[[Page 1463]]

Central Business District (CBD), Funding, Right-of-Way Permit and US 
Army COE Section 404 Permit Issuance, Harris, Fort Bend and Waller 
Counties, TX.
Summary: EPA had no further comments to offer on the FinalEnvironmental 
Impact Statement.

    Dated: January 8, 2002.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 02-722 Filed 1-10-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U