[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 5 (Friday, January 7, 1994)]
[Notices]
[Page 1016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-390]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: January 7, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-4707-3]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared December 20, 1993 through
December 24, 1993 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 April 10, 1993 (58
FR 18392).
Draft EISs
ERP No. D-AFS-L65212-ID Rating EO2, Prichard Creek Analysis Area,
Land and Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Idaho Panhandle
National Forests, Wallace Ranger District, Coeur d'Alene River, ID.
Summary: EPA had environmental objections with alternatives 1, 2 &
5 based on the potential for continued and increased adverse impacts on
water quality and fisheries. EPA expressed environmental concerns with
alternatives 2 and 6 due to potential impacts to water quality and
fisheries. Additional information is needed on baseline water quality,
cumulative impacts and monitoring.
ERP No. D-UAF-E11032-FL Rating EC2, Homestead Air Force Base (AFB)
Disposal and Reuse, Implementation, Dade County, FL.
Summary: EPA had environmental concerns with the impact due to the
uncertainty associated with this proposal and the need for additional
information. Depending on the particular alternative and/or mix of
options which eventuate, additional NEPA evaluation may be necessary.
ERP No. D-USA-L11019-WA Rating EO2, Fort Lewis and Yakima Training
Center, Stationing of Mechanized or Armored Combat Forces, COE Section
10 and 404 Permits, Pierce, Thurston, Yakima and Kittitas Counties, WA.
Summary: EPA had environmental objections based on the potential
for adverse effects on air quality, the potential for further
degradation of water bodies that are already water quality impaired,
the potential for destruction of wetlands, and potential adverse
effects on sage grouse. EPA requested additional analysis of air
quality, water quality and wetland impacts. In addition the final EIS
should discuss the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures
and describe in detail the monitoring plan.
Dated: January 3, 1994.
William D. Dickerson,
Deputy Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 94-390 Filed 1-6-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE: 6560-50-P
