[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 111 (Friday, June 10, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-14186]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 10, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-4712-2]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared May 23, 1994 through May 27,
1994 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 8, 1994 (59 FR
16807).
Draft EISs
ERP No. D-BLM-E65044-FL Rating EC2, Florida Land and Resource
Management Plan, Implementation, Split-Estate Federal Mineral Ownership
(FMO), several counties, FL.
Summary: EPA supported alternative 2, but expressed environmental
concerns regarding the potential wetland and wading bird impacts.
ERP No. D-FHW-K40202-CA Rating EO2, CA-58--Mojave Freeway Project,
Construction from 0.1 mile east of the Cache Creek Bridge to 5.0 miles
east of the town of Mojave, Funding, COE Section 404 Permit and Right-
of-Way Acquisition, Kern County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental objections due to the loss and
fragmentation of habitat for the desert tortoise, a species listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The preferred alternative
affects the most desert tortoise habitat despite the US Fish & Wildlife
Service's strong recommendation to avoid habitat loss and
fragmentation. EPA's second objection was the failure of the draft EIS
to address the requirements of the Clean Water Act Section 404 or its
regulations. The preferred alternative had the most impact to waters of
the United States, according to the draft EIS. The final EIS needs to
address the project's consistency with Section 404 requirements,
including impact mitigation.
ERP No. D-FHW-L40189-WA Rating EC2, WA-525/Paine Field Boulevard
Project, Improvements, between WA-99 to WA-526, Funding and COE Section
404 Permit, City of Mukitteo, Snohomish County, WA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential
for adverse impacts on water quality, wetlands and fisheries resources.
EPA had requested additional information on effects of the estimated
annual pollutant load on water quality, effectiveness of mitigation,
and potential impacts on natural resources from indirect effects,
secondary and cumulative impacts.
ERP No. D-NPS-K61128-CA Rating EC2, Santa Rosa Island Development
Concept Plan, Implementation and Funding, Channel Islands National
Park, Santa Barbara County, CA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns regarding potential
adverse impacts to water quality from the project, particularly
construction-related impacts. The final EIS should closely examine
potential project impacts to water quality and water quality mitigation
measures which may prove necessary under the Clean Water Act
(stormwater permitting from construction actions, consistency with
California's nonpoint source management program). The final EIS should
provide details on hazardous substances which could have emanated from
a defunct air force base on the Island.
Final EISs
ERP No. F-AFS-K67021-NV, Jerritt Canyon Gold Mine Expansion
Project, Implementation, Plan of Operation and COE Section 404 Permit,
Humboldt National Forest, Mountain City Ranger District, Elko County,
NV.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the new
information in the final EIS on the acid potential of waste rock at the
project site, EPA had serious concerns regarding waste rock
characterization, handling and disposal.
ERP No. F-DOE-L05204-WA, Tenaska--Washington II Generation Electric
Power Plant Construction, Operation and NPDES Permit, Pierce County,
WA.
Summary: EPA had a lack of objection to the proposed project.
ERP No. F-FAA-L51014-WA, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
Improvement, South Aviation Support Area, Airport Layout Plan, Airport
Master Plan, Funding, Section 10 and 404 Permits and NPDES Permit, Port
of Seattle, King County, WA.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns based on potential
effects to wetland and aquatic resources. EPA recommended the
development of a wetland plan that is an enforceable condition of a 404
permit. Mitigation measures to deal with flow attenuation in Des Moines
Creek remain inadequate. EPA recommended that the types and amounts of
pollutants that will enter Puget Sound be documented in the Record of
Decision.
ERP No. F-IBR-K39032-CA, All-American Canal (AAC) Lining Project,
Construction and Operation, Lining a 23-mile Canal from Pilot Knob to
Drop 4, Controlling Water Seepage, Imperial Irrigation District,
Imperial County, CA.
Summary: EPA had no objection to the proposed action.
Dated: June 7, 1994.
Marshall Cain,
Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 94-14186 Filed 6-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U
