[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 240 (Friday, December 13, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76740-76741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-31463]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6635-8]


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 April 12, 2002 (67 FR 17992).

Draft EISs

    ERP No. D-FHW-E40796-NC Rating EC2, U.S. 64 Corridor Project, 
Transportation Improvements in the vicinity of the City of Asheboro and 
Access Improvements to the NC Zoological Park, Funding and U.S. Army 
COE section 404 Permit Issuance, Randolph County, NC.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding primary 
impacts as a result of project implementation. These include a large 
number of residential relocations, with many residences experiencing 
excessive noise increases and the loss of deciduous forest and surface 
water habitat. EPA requested that deletion of one or two proposed 
interchanges be evaluated.
    ERP No. D-FHW-F40409-IN Rating LO, IN-25 Transportation Corridor 
Improvements from I-65 Interchange to U.S. 24, Funding, Right-of-Way 
and U.S. Army COE section 404 Permit Issuance, Hoosier Heartland 
Highway, Tippecanoe, Carroll and Cass Counties, IN.
    Summary: EPA believes that the proposed project will result in 
minimum adverse impacts to the environment with the appropriate 
mitigation. No additional analyses are required.
    ERP No. D-FHW-K40253-CA Rating 3, Riverside County Integrated 
Project, Winchester to Temecula Corridor Construction of a New Multi-
Modal Transportation Facility, Route Location and Right-of-Way 
Preservation, Riverside County, CA.
    Summary: EPA found that the DEIS was inadequate to satisfy the 
requirements of NEPA and lead to the selection of a preferred alignment 
containing the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative 
to satisfy section 404 of the Clean Water

[[Page 76741]]

Act. The DEIS evaluated the two CETAP corridors in isolation of one 
another and of other major pending highway projects, did not adequately 
analyze a No Build alternative, and lacked adequate assessment of 
indirect and cumulative impacts on aquatic and biological resources as 
well as water and air quality. EPA recommends that these concerns be 
addressed in a revised DEIS.
    ERP No. D-FHW-K40254-CA Rating 3, Riverside County Integrated 
Project, Hemet to Corona/Lake Elsinore Corridor a New Multi-Modal 
Transportation Facility, Route Location and Right-of-Way Preservation, 
Riverside County, CA.
    Summary: EPA found that the DEIS was inadequate to satisfy the 
requirements of NEPA and lead to the selection of a preferred alignment 
containing the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative 
to satisfy section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The DEIS evaluated the 
two CETAP corridors in isolation of one another and of other major 
pending highway projects, did not adequately analyze a No Build 
alternative, and lacked adequate assessment of indirect and cumulative 
impacts on aquatic and biological resources as well as water and air 
quality. EPA recommends that these concerns be addressed in a revised 
DEIS.

Final EISs

    ERP No. F-BLM-K67054-NV, Phoenix Project, Current Mining Operations 
and Processing Activities Expansion, Battle Mountain, Plan of 
Operations Approval, Lander County, NV.
    Summary: The final EIS does not address EPA's concern that the 
long-term post-closure mitigation will not be adequately funded. The 
environmental acceptability of the project depends on adequate funding 
of the mitigation plan to prevent degradation of water quality and 
impacts to biological resources. The final EIS continues to be 
inadequate since it does not include an itemized cost estimate for the 
mitigation or assurance that funds will be available in perpetuity to 
perform the project startup.
    ERP No. F-COE-C30011-NJ, New Jersey Shore Protection Study to 
Determine a Feasible Hurricane and Storm Damage Reduction Plan from 
Manasquan Inlet to Barnegat Inlet, Boroughs of Point Pleasant Beach, 
Bay Head, Mantoloking, Lavallette, Seaside Heights and Seaside Park, 
and Townships of Buck, Dover and Berkeley, NJ.
    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns and requests 
an opportunity to review a complete cumulative impacts and analysis and 
General Conformity Determination prior to the signing of the Record of 
Decision for the project.
    ERP No. F-FHW-J40149-CO, Colorado Forest Highway 80, Guanella Pass 
Road (also known as Park County Road 62/Clear Creek County Road 381/
Forest Development Road 118) from U.S. 285 in Grant to Georgetown, 
Improvements, Funding and U.S. Army COE Section 404, NPDES and Special 
Use Permits Issuance, Park and Clear Creek Counties, CO.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about wetland impacts 
and mitigation implementation.
    ERP No. F-FHW-K40244-CA, CA-120 Oakdale Expressway Project, 
Construction and Operation, Post Mile 3.0 to Post Mile R12.9 near 
Oakdale, Funding, U.S. Army COE Section 404 and NPDES Permits Issuance, 
Stanislaus County, CA.
    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns and recommended that 
FHWA request and obtain EPA's written concurrence on the least 
environmentally damaging practicable alternative and conceptual 
mitigation plan prior to the signing of the record of decision (ROD) in 
accordance with the NEPA/404 Memorandum of Understanding. EPA believes 
that the FEIS lacks sufficient information on indirect and cumulative 
impacts and a qualitative PM-10 analysis. In addition, the conceptual 
mitigation plan presented in the FEIS does not clearly show how it will 
adequately offset the project's wetland impacts.
    ERP No. FS-AFS-E65036-00, Vegetation Management in the Coastal 
Plain/Piedmont, Proposal to Clarify Direction for Conducting Project-
Level Inventories for Biological Evaluations (BEs), U.S. Forest Service 
Southern Region, AL, GA, FL, SC, NC, LA, MS and TX.
    Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
    ERP No. FS-AFS-E65037-00, Vegetation Management in the Appalachian 
Mountains, Proposal to Clarify Direction for Conducting Project-Level 
Inventories for Biological Evaluations (BEs), AL, GA, KY, NC, SC, TN, 
VA and WV.
    Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

    Dated: December 10, 2002.
Joseph C. Montgomery,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 02-31463 Filed 12-12-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P