[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 72 (Friday, April 12, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16249-16250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9161]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-5415-5]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared March 25, 1996 through March
29, 1996 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 5, 1996 (61 FR
15251).
Draft EISs
ERP No. D-AFS-K61139-CA Trinity Alps Wilderness Plan,
Implementation, Shasta-Trinity National Forest, Klamath National Forest
and Six Rivers National Forest, Humboldt, Siskiyou and Trinity
Counties, CA.
Summary: Due to the federal furlough of December 18, 1995 through
January 5, 1996, the Environmental Protection Agency did not review the
EIS.
ERP No. D-DOE-G09801-NM Rating LO, Medical Isotopes Production
Project (MIPP), Establish and Produce a Continuous Supply of
Molybdenum-99 and Related Isotopes, Bernalillo County, NM.
Summary: EPA had no objections to the selection of the preferred
alternative.
ERP No. D-FHW-E40355-FL Rating EC2, Miami Intermodal Center (MIC),
Construction, Bounded by FL-112 on the north, FL-836 on the south,
Miami International Airport landside terminal NW 27th Avenue on the
east, along FL-836 that extends West to NW 57th Avenue, Dade County,
FL.
Summary: EPA's review found that the document adequately addressed
most projected impacts the human environment. Additional information
was requested on the air quality analysis and mitigation of impacts.
ERP No. D-FHW-E40766-TN Rating EO2, TN 840 North from I-40 East
near Lebanon in Wilson County to I-40 West in Dickson County,
Construction, COE Section 404 and CGD Permits, Wilson, Dickson, Sumner,
Robertson, Montgomery and Cheatham Counties, TN.
Summary: EPA's review found that the proposed project could have
significant direct and induced impacts of forest and water resources.
Specific information for potential mitigation of impacts is lacking and
should be included in the final EIS.
ERP No. DS-FHW-D40242-VA Rating EU2, Southeastern Expressway
Improvements, I-464/I-64 to VA-44 (Norfolk-Virginia Beach Expressway),
Updated Information concerning Alternatives Under Consideration,
Funding , COE Section 10 and 40 Permits and US Coast Guard Bridge
Permit, Cities of Chesapeake and Virginia Beach, York and James City
Co., VA.
Summary: EPA finds the potential significant impacts of the
candidate build alternatives to wetland (319-406 acres) and important
terrestrail (300-400 acres) habitats unsatisfactory. Additionally, the
inability of the project to meet its stated purpose and need (primarily
to relieve traffic congestion); its failure to meet a project
commitment of implementation of a true multi-modal transportation
project; and potential impacts on the Federally threatened Dismal Swamp
shrew are unsatisfactory. The document also failed to commit to a
mitigation plan which would adequately compensate for direct and
indirect project impacts.
ERP No. DS-FTA-C51014-NJ Rating LO, Hudson River Waterfront
Transportation Corridor Improvements, (officially now referred to as
Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit System), Funding, Jersey City, Hudson
and Bergen Counties, NJ.
Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in
significant adverse environmental impacts; therefore, EPA had no
objection to its implementation.
ERP No. D1-FTA-C51014-NJ Rating EC2, Hudson-Bergen Light Rail
Transit System, Bayonne Extension, Improvements, Funding, Hudson and
Bergen Counties, NJ.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential
impacts to wetlands and water quality. Accordingly, EPA has requested
that additional information be provided in the final EIS to address
these issues.
Final EISs
ERP No. F-AFS-A65161-00 Gypsy Moth Management in the United States:
A Cooperative Approach, Implementation, US.
Summary: EPA had no objections to the preferred alternative as
described in the final EIS.
ERP No. F-AFS-K65164-00 Southwestern Region Amendment of Forest
Plans, Implementation, Standard and Guidelines for Northern Goshawk and
Mexican Spotted Owl, AZ and NM.
Summary: Review of the Final EIS was not deemed necessary. No
formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
ERP No. F-BOP-C81015-NY New York Federal Detention Center,
Construction and Operation, Possible Site Selection, Alboin Site and
Batavia Site, NY.
Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in
significant adverse environmental
[[Page 16250]]
impacts, therefore, EPA had no objection to its implementation.
ERP No. F-FTA-C40133-PR Tren Urbano Transit Project, Improvement,
San Juan Metropolitan Area, Funding, NPDES Permit, US Coast Guard
Bridge Permit and COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, PR.
Summary: EPA believed that the proposed project will not result in
significant adverse environmental impacts; therefore, EPA had no
objection to its implementation.
Dated: April 9, 1996.
William D. Dickerson,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 96-9161 Filed 4-11-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
