[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8242-8243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-4270]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6626-8]


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) 564-7167. 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-J65357-MT Rating EC2, White Pine Creek Project, 
Timber Harvest, Prescribe Fire Burning, Watershed Restoration and 
Associated Activities, Implementation, Kootenai National Forest, 
Cabinet Ranger District, Sanders County, MT.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about increased peak 
flow from proposed timber harvest and impacts to the threatened bull 
trout. A biological assessment for the bull trout should have been 
included in the DEIS. EPA believes additional information is needed to 
fully assess and mitigate all potential impacts of the management 
actions.
    ERP No. D-FRC-B05192-ME Rating EC2, Presumpscot River Projects, 
Relicensing of Five Hydroelectric Projects for Construction and 
Operation, Dundee Project (FERC No. 2942); Gambo Project (FERC No. 
2931); Little Falls Project (FERC No. 2932); Mallison Falls Project 
(FERC No. 2941) and Saccarappa Project (FERC No. 2897), Cumberland 
County, ME.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the absence of 
fish passage measures for anadromous fish for portions of the project, 
and that the EIS understated the effect of dam removal in combination 
with adequate fish passage on restoration of aquatic resources/water 
quality of the river. EPA also believes that FERC recommended bypass 
flows are too low and should be raised year round to increase habitat 
for fish, aquatic invertebrates and resident fish so water quality 
standards are met.
    ERP No. DS-AFS-J65295-MT Rating EC2, Clancy-Unionville Vegetation 
Manipulation and Travel Management Project, Updated and New Information 
concerning Cumulative Effects and Introduction of Alternative F, 
Clancy-Unionville Implementation Area, Helena National Forest, Helena 
Ranger District, Lewis and Clark and Jefferson Counties, MT.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the levels 
of road rehabilitation. EPA recommended that additional information 
should be presented regarding increased road rehabilitation and 
consistency of proposed actions with State TMDL development.
    ERP No. DS-AFS-L65376-OR Rating EC2, Silvies Canyon Watershed 
Restoration Project, Additional Information concerning Ecosystem Health 
Improvements in the Watershed, Grant and Harney Counties, OR.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns with impacts to air 
quality and concerns about insufficient disclosure of tribal 
consultation and coordination.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-FRC-B03012-00, Phase III/Hubline Project, Construction 
and Operation a Natural Gas Pipeline, Maritimes and Northeast Pipeline 
(Docket No. CP01-4-000), Algonquin Gas Transmission (Docket No. CP01-5-
000) and Texas Eastern Transmission (Docket No. CP01-8-000), MA and CT.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to 
water supply sources and about mitigation associated with the project. 
EPA also expressed concerns about NEPA process related issues.
    ERP No. F-FTA-B59001-CT, New Britain--Hartford Busway Project, 
Proposal to Build an Exclusive Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Facility, 
Located in the Towns/Cities of New Britain, Newington, West Hartford 
and Hartford CT.
    Summary: EPA expressed a lack of environmental objections to the 
project and applauded the FTA/CTDOT decision to construct a multi-use 
path as part of the project and continues to suggest that the vehicles 
on the busway should use alternative fuel or be cleaner diesel vehicles 
that use particulate filters. EPA also encouraged FTA/CTDOT to commit 
resources to support transit oriented development in the vicinity of 
the busway stations.
    ERP No. F-USN-B11024-MA, South Weymouth Naval Air Station, Disposal 
and Reuse, Norfolk and Plymouth Counties, MA.

[[Page 8243]]

    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about impacts 
of the project related to traffic/air quality, water supply, wastewater 
treatment and land use and associated mitigation. EPA continued to 
encourage the Navy to consider mechanisms (smart growth and others) to 
determine whether the base redevelopment could occur in a manner that 
would result in fewer environmental impacts.

    Dated: February 19, 2002.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 02-4270 Filed 2-21-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P