[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 90 (Friday, May 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25611-25613]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-12242]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-5480-3]
Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Final
Rule for Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental Activities
in Antarctica
AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the Final Rule for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of
Nongovernmental Activities in Antarctica.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PURPOSE: The U.S. EPA, in accordance with Section 102(2)(c) of the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), will prepare a Draft EIS for
the proposed final regulations that will provide for: (1) Environmental
impact assessment of nongovernmental activities, including tourism, in
Antarctica for which the United States is required to give advance
notice under paragraph 5 of Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty of
1959, and (2) coordination of the review of information regarding
environmental impact assessments received by the United States from
other Parties to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the
Antarctic Treaty. These final regulations will be prepared pursuant to
the Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996. EPA
invites comments and suggestions on the scope of the rulemaking and
analysis including the environmental and regulatory issues to be
addressed in the EIS.
DATES: Written comments from the public regarding the environmental and
regulatory issues and alternatives to be addressed in the Draft EIS
will be accepted by EPA through July 15, 1997. The EPA will also hold a
public meeting on Tuesday, July 8, 1997, in Washington, DC,
metropolitan area to receive public input, either verbal or written, on
relevant environmental and regulatory issues that should be addressed
in the Draft EIS. The specific location and time of the public meeting
will be published in the Federal Register at a later date with this
information mailed directly to those requesting to be on the project
mailing list.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND TO BE PLACED ON THE PROJECT MAILING LIST
CONTACT: Mr. Joseph Montgomery or Ms. Katherine Biggs, Office of
Federal Activities (2252A), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone: (202) 564-7157 or (202)
564-7144, respectively. Copies of the Environmental Assessment, Finding
of No Significant Impact, and Interim Final Rule discussed in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below may be requested from these
contacts. These documents are also available on the World Wide Web at:
http://es.inel.gov/oeca/ofa/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background: Environmental Assessment and Interim Final Rule
The Antarctic Science, Tourism, and Conservation Act of 1996 (Act)
implements the Protocol on Environmental Protection (Protocol) to the
Antarctic Treaty (Treaty). Pursuant to the Act, the EPA is required to
promulgate regulations by October 2, 1998, that provide for assessment
of the environmental impacts of nongovernmental activities, including
tourism, in Antarctica and for coordination of the review of
information regarding environmental impact assessments received from
other Parties to the Protocol. The EPA promulgated an Interim Final
Rule on April 30, 1998, (Federal Register/Vol. 62, No. 83/Wednesday,
April 30, 1997/23538-23549) so that the United States would have the
ability to implement its obligations under the Protocol as soon as the
Protocol enters into force. The EPA also prepared an ``Environmental
Assessment of Proposed Interim Rules for Non-Governmental Activity in
Antarctica'' (EA) to evaluate the environmental and cultural impacts of
the interim rule. Based on the EA's analysis, EPA issued a Finding of
No Significant Impact (FNSI) concluding that the promulgation of the
Interim Final Rule will not have or cause significant impacts on the
Antarctic environment. The Interim Final Rule: sets forth appropriate
environmental impact assessment and documentation procedures, including
documentation regarding planned mitigation and monitoring, if
appropriate, by tour operators; enhances the collection of data on
effects and intensity of activities by nongovernmental visitors in
Antarctica; and reduces the likelihood of inadvertent environmental
perturbations that may be avoidable.
II. Description of Final Rule to be Developed and the Issues and
Alternatives to be Considered in the EIS for the Final Rule
During the time the Interim Final Rule is in place and before the
October 1998 deadline set by the Act, EPA will
[[Page 25612]]
promulgate a Final Rule that will provide for assessment of
environmental impacts of nongovernmental activities, including tourism,
in Antarctica and for coordination of the review of information
regarding environmental impact assessments received from other Parties
to the Protocol. In support of this regulatory action, EPA is preparing
an EIS to consider the environmental and regulatory issues to be
addressed in the Final Rule and the alternatives for addressing these
issues within the rule-making process. The alternatives considered by
EPA in the Draft EIS will include: (1) No Action, i.e., EPA does not
promulgate a Final Rule; (2) promulgation of the requirements of the
Interim Final Rule as the Final Rule; and (3) other relevant
alternatives necessary to address the associated environmental and
regulatory issues raised by EPA and the public. In developing the Draft
EIS, EPA will be guided by the statutory requirements of the Act
including the requirement that ``* * * regulations shall be consistent
with Annex I to the Protocol'' 16 U.S.C. 2403a(c)(2). The EPA will also
consider other relevant regulatory provisions and programs such as: the
enforcement provisions of and authorities under the Antarctic
Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.; the National Science
Foundation's (NSF) management of the U.S. Antarctic Program for
governmental activities, 45 CFR Part 641; the National Environmental
Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 to 4370d, and as referenced in 16 U.S.C.
2403a(a)(1)(A); the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ)
Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508, and EPA's Procedures
for Implementing the Requirements of the Council on Environmental
Quality on the National Environmental Policy Act, 40 CFR Part 6. The
EPA plans to consider the following issues, along with any other
relevant alternatives or issues raised by the public, in the Draft EIS:
(1) Do the time frames of the Interim Final Rule for the submittal
and review of the environmental documentation need to be changed?
(2) Should EPA's review criteria more explicitly identify factors
to assess in determining the environmental impact of proposed actions?
Article 3 of the Protocol, ``Environmental Principles,'' identifies a
number of environmental principles for the planning and conduct of
activities in Antarctica to protect both the Antarctic environment and
its value for the conduct of science in Antarctica. Can and/or should
these Principles be more fully integrated into the review criteria to
ensure that the environmental analysis provides an understanding of the
extent to which the activity will comport with the provisions of
Article 3?
(3) What is the appropriate monitoring regime, if any, that should
be set out for various types of nongovernmental expeditions? The
Protocol requires procedures to assess and verify the actual impacts of
an activity which proceeds on the basis of an initial environmental
evaluation (IEE) or a comprehensive environmental evaluation (CEE). An
operator must provide appropriate monitoring of key environmental
indicators for an activity proceeding on the basis of a CEE; further,
an operator may also need to carry out monitoring for which an IEE has
been prepared. The Treaty Parties are still working to identify
monitoring approaches which can best support the Protocol's
implementation. Until the Parties agree on such an approach, should the
procedures provided for in the Interim Final Rule be expanded or remain
the same?
(4) Are there other options for streamlining the documentation
requirements? The Interim Final Rule provides for incorporation of
materials by reference, consolidation of environmental documentation,
and waiver of deadlines, options that reduce the burden on the
regulated parties. What other streamlining options should be
considered? For example, should there be provisions to allow operators
to rely on environmental assessment documentation prepared for past
expeditions in cases where there are no changes proposed relative to
the proposed expedition(s)? Should there be a provision to allow
operators to prepare a ``Programmatic'' IEE or CEE? (Drawing on the
NEPA analogy, a Programmatic EIS is an area-wide or overview EIS to
address similar activities viewed with other reasonably foreseeable or
proposed activities that share common timing or geography. A
Programmatic EIS may serve as a basis for tiering, including
incorporation by referencing general and relevant specific discussions
from it into an EIS of a lesser scope).
(5) What mitigation options should be considered as part of the EIA
process? Should mitigation be required for certain activities?
(6) What is the best way to address cumulative impacts?
Characterization of impacts from single events is direct and relatively
uncomplicated as compared to characterization of cumulative impacts
since cumulative impacts involve multiple events over time and often
result from the effects of more than one source on a single receptor at
a single point in time.
(7) Are there activities, or categories of activities, that can be
excluded from the environmental documentation requirements (e.g.,
Categorical Exclusions)? The CEQ regulations define ``categorical
exclusion'' as ``a category of actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment * * *
and for which, therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required'' (40 CFR 1508.4).
(8) Should there be provision for public comment on Initial
Environmental Evaluations? This is not required by the Protocol. The
Interim Final Rule provides for posting notice of receipt of IEEs on
the OFA World Wide Web site and to provide copies to the public upon
request.
(9) With regard to the review of environmental documents received
from other Parties, should the process as delineated in the Interim
Final Rule be modified?
(10) Do the paperwork projections in the Interim Final Rule
accurately reflect the reporting requirements for those subject to the
Final Rule?
Scoping and Public Comments
Although the Interim Final Rule was promulgated without public
notice and comment, the Final Rule and the associated EIS will include
extensive opportunities for public comment. The EIS process is subject
to the public participation requirements of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR parts 1501.7, 1502.19, and 1503) and EPA's
NEPA implementing regulations (40 CFR part 6, subpart D), and the Final
Rule will be proposed and promulgated in accordance with the applicable
provision of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). An
integral part of the NEPA process is public participation in the
Scoping process, the key purpose of which is to identify the
environmental and regulatory issues and alternatives to be addressed in
the Draft EIS. The public may participate in the initial scoping
process including the scoping meeting discussed in the DATES section
above. The public will also have an opportunity to comment on the Draft
EIS and the proposed Final Rule.
[[Page 25613]]
Estimated Date of Release
The Draft EIS and proposed Final Rule will be made available in
January 1998.
Richard E. Sanderson,
Director, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 97-12242 Filed 5-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
