[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 229 (Friday, November 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63331-63332]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-31250]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-5486-8]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared November 10, 1997 Through
November 14, 1997 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 11, 1997 (62
FR 16154).
Draft EISs
ERP No. D-FHW-K40227-CA Rating EC2, I-880 Interchange at Dixon
Landing Road Reconstruction Improvements, Funding and COE Section 404
Permit, Fremont, Milpitas, Alameda and Santa Clara Counties, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding the lack of
full disclosure of alternatives impacts due to the proposed width of
the overcrossing. EPA requested clarification of these issues and
mitigation involving revegetation and restoring old road beds be
discussed.
ERP No. D-NOA-E70000-GA Rating LO, State of Georgia Coastal
Management Program, Comprehensive Coastal Land and Water Use
Activities, Approval and Implementation, GA.
Summary: EPA had lack of objections with the proposed project. EPA
did not identify any potential environmental impacts requiring
substantial change to the proposal, and that the alternatives and their
consequences were reasonably disclosed.
ERP No. D-SCS-G36146-OK Rating LO, Middle Deep Red Run Creek
Watershed Plan, Implementation, Funding and Possible COE Section 404
Permit, Central Rolling Red Plains, Tillman, Comanche and Kiowa
Counties, OK.
Summary: EPA had lack of objection to the selection of the Natural
Resources Conservation Service's preferred alternative as described in
the Draft EIS.
ERP No. D-USN-K11082-CA Rating EC2, San Diego Naval Training Center
(NTC) Disposal and Reuse of Certain Real Properties, Implementation,
City of San Diego, San Diego County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding biological
and water resources cumulative impacts and environmental justice. EPA
requested that these issues be clarified in the Final EIS.
Final EISs
ERP No. F-BOP-E80001-KY, United States Penitentiary Martin County,
Construction and Operation, Possible Sites, Bizwell and Honey Branch
Sites, located in Martin and Johnson Counties, KY.
Summary: EPA had lack of objections with the proposed project. All
of EPA's
[[Page 63332]]
comments on the Draft EIS were sufficiently addressed in the Final EIS.
The Federal Bureau of Prisons expressed their commitment to preserving
wetlands.
ERP No. F-DOE-G06004-TX, Pantex Plant Continued Operation and
Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components, Implementation,
Approvals and Permits Issuance, Carson County, TX.
Summary: EPA had lack of objections to the action as proposed.
EPA's environmental concerns with the Draft EIS have been resolved.
ERP No. F-FAA-E11040-NC, Adoption--Camp Lejeune Marine Corps Base
Camp, Expansion and Realignment for Additional Training Needs,
Implementation, Onslow County, NC.
Summary: After reviewing the new information relating to airspace
issues. EPA's initial concerns have not been resolved.
ERP No. F-FHW-G40144-AR, US 71 Relocation, Construction extending
from US 70 in DeQueen to I-40 near Alma, AR, Funding and COE Section
404 Permit, Sevier, Polk, Scott, Sebastian and Crawford Counties, AR.
Summary: Review of the Final EIS has been completed and the project
found to be satisfactory.
ERP No. F-USN-C10003-00, Relocatable over the Horizon Radar (ROTHR)
System Construction and Operation, New and Updated Information on Fort
Allen as Potential Site, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and Chesapeake,
VA.
Summary: EPA had no objection to the implementation of the proposed
project. Based on the review of the Final EIS EPA does not anticipate
that the proposed project will result in significant adverse
environmental impacts, provided the mitigation measures are followed.
Dated: November 24, 1997.
William D. Dickerson,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 97-31250 Filed 11-26-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
