Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 54739-54740 [05-18428]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices
at wood.amanetta@epa.gov. The finding
is available at EPA’s conformity Web
site: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
transp.htm (once there, click on the
‘‘Transportation Conformity’’ text icon,
then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP
Submissions’’).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Today’s notice is simply an
announcement of a finding that EPA has
already made. EPA Region 4 sent a letter
to TDEC on August 16, 2005, stating that
the MVEBs submitted in the Nashville
1-hour ozone maintenance plan update
dated August 10, 2005, are adequate.
EPA’s adequacy comment period ran
from June 9 through July 11, 2005. This
finding has also been announced on
EPA’s conformity Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/transp.htm, (once
there, click ‘‘Transportation
Conformity’’ text icon, then look for
‘‘Adequacy Review of SIP
Submissions’’). The adequate MVEBs
are provided in the following table:
NASHVILLE AREA MVEBS
[Tons per day]
2016
VOC ............................................
NOX ............................................
21.93
45.76
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176 (c) of the Clean Air Act.
EPA’s conformity rule requires that
transportation plans, programs and
projects conform to state air quality
implementation plans and establishes
the criteria and procedures for
determining whether or not they do.
Conformity to a SIP means that
transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards.
The criteria by which EPA determines
whether a SIP’s MVEBs are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes are
outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please
note that an adequacy review is separate
from EPA’s SIP submittal completeness
review, and it also should not be used
to prejudge EPA’s ultimate approval of
the SIP. Even if EPA finds the MVEBs
adequate, the Agency may later
determine that the SIP itself is not
approvable.
EPA has described the process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999
memorandum entitled ‘‘Conformity
Guidance on Implementation of March
2, 1999 Conformity Court Decision’’).
EPA has followed this guidance in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:04 Sep 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
making this adequacy determination.
This guidance is incorporated into
EPA’s July 1, 2004, final rulemaking
entitled ‘‘Transportation Conformity
Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour
Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments: Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Changes’’
(69 FR 40004).
Dated: September 1, 2005.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 05–18424 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–6667–5]
Environmental Impact Statements and
Regulations; Availability of EPA
Comments
Availability of EPA comments
prepared 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 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20050202, ERP No. D-CGDA03086–00, Programmatic—Vessel
and Facility Response Plans for Oil:
2003 Removal Equipment
Requirements and Alternative
Technology Revisions, To Increase the
Oil Removal Capability, U.S.
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ),
United States, Alaska, Guam, Puerto
Rico and other U.S. Territories.
Summary: EPA expressed concerns
related to the synergistic effects of
chemical dispersants with oil on water
quality and organisms within the water
column, spill modeling, and model
limitations for the fate and effect of
chemically dispersed oil.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050235, ERP No. D–NPS–
F65057–IN, Lincoln Boyhood
National Memorial General
Management Plan, Implementation,
Lincoln City, Spencer County, IN.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed action.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54739
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050266, ERP No. D–DOE–
A00171–00, Proposed Consolidation
of Nuclear Operations Related to
Production of radioisotope Power
Systems, Located or Planned Sites:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
(ORNL), Tennessee; Los Alamos
National Laboratory (LANL), New
Mexico; and the Idaho National
Laboratory (INL), Idaho, TN, NM, ID.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050310, ERP No. D–JUS–
G81013–TX, Laredo Detention
Facility, Proposed Contractor-Owned/
Contractor-Operated Detention
Facility, Implementation, Webb
County, TX.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050300, ERP No. DS–NOA–
E55555–00, Reef Fish (Amendment
25) and Coastal Migratory Pelagic
(Amendment 17) for Extending the
Charter Vessel/Headboat Permit
Moratorium, Gulf of Mexico and
South Atlantic.
Summary: EPA agrees with the
extension of the permit moratorium, but
recommended that any available
moratorium data be evaluated and
summarized in the FSEIS as part of the
decision-making process.
Rating LO
Final EISs
EIS No. 20050270, ERP No. F–NRC–
E06024–AL, Generic—License
Renewal of Nuclear Plants for Browns
Ferry, Unit 1, 2 and 33 (TAC Nos.
MC7168, MC1769, and MC1770),
Supplement 21 to NUREG–1437,
Implementation, Athens, AL.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns because of the
uncertainty of the ultimate location of a
permitted repository site for the
radioactive waste.
EIS No. 20050317, ERP No. F–NAS–
E12007–FL, New Horizons Mission to
Pluto, Continued Preparations and
Implementation to Explore Pluto and
Potentially the Recently Discovered
Kuiper Belt, Cape Canaveral Air Force
Station, FL.
Summary: EPA’s previous issues have
been resolved therefore, EPA has no
objection to the proposed action.
EIS No. 20050334, ERP No. F–DOE–
J91000–MT, South Fork Flathead
Watershed Westslope Cutthroat Trout
Conservation Program, Preserve the
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
54740
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 179 / Friday, September 16, 2005 / Notices
Genetic Purity of the Westslope
Cutthroat Trout Population, Flathead
National Forest, Flathead River,
Flathead, Powell and Missoula
Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about potential
impacts to aquatic ecosystem integrity,
particularly effects to non-target species,
and ecological impacts of restocking
historically fishless lakes. EPA
emphasizes the need to follow strict
pesticide application protocols with
appropriate management and mitigation
measures, and establishment of a
comprehensive monitoring and adaptive
management program to minimize
ecological and public health risks
during project implementation.
EIS No. 20050335, ERP No. FS–AFS–
J65419–MT, Gallatin National Forest,
Updated Information, Replaces the
Effects Analysis for the Northern
Goshawk in the Main Boulder Fuels
Reduction Project (FEIS),
Implementation, Gallatin National
Forest, Big Timber Ranger District,
Sweetgrass and Park Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed action and supports the
proposed ecological effects monitoring.
Dated: September 13, 2005.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05–18428 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–6667–4]
Environmental Impacts Statements;
Notice of Availability
Responsible Agency: Office of Federal
Activities, General Information (202)
564–7167 or https://www.epa.gov/
compliance/nepa/.
Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact
Statements
Filed 09/06/2005 Through 09/09/2005.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
EIS No. 20050372, Final EIS, AFS, AZ,
Pickett Lake and Padre Canyon
Allotments Cattle Grazing
Management, Authorization and
Implementation, Coconino National
Forest, Mormon Lake Ranger District,
Coconino County, AZ, Wait Period
Ends: 10/17/2005, Contact: Katherine
Sanchez Meador 928–526–0866.
EIS No. 20050373, Final EIS, COE, MO,
Howard Bend Floodplain Area Study,
Improvements for Future Land,
Future Road, and Stormwater
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:04 Sep 15, 2005
Jkt 205001
Management, Missouri River Flood
Developments, U.S. Army COE
Section 10 and 404 Permits, St. Louis
County, MO, Wait Period Ends: 10/
17/2005, Contact: Danny McClendon
314–331–8574.
EIS No. 20050374, Draft EIS, BLM, CA,
Ukiah Resource Management Plan,
Implementation, Several Counties,
CA, Comment Period Ends: 12/15/
2005, Contact: Eli Ilano 916–978–
4427.
EIS No. 20050375, Draft Supplement,
FHW, TN, TN–397 (Mack Hatcher
Parkway Extension) Construction
from US–31 (TN–6, Columbia
Avenue) South of Franklin to US–341
(TN–106, Hillsboro Road) North of
Franklin, Additional Information on
the Build Alternative (Alternative G),
Williamson County and City of
Franklin, TN , Comment Period Ends:
10/31/2005, Contact: Walter Boyd
615–781–5774.
EIS No. 20050376, Final EIS, COE, TX,
Cedar Bayou Navigation Chanel
(CBNC.) Improvement Project,
Implementation, Near Baytown in
Harris and Chambers Counties, TX,
Wait Period Ends: 10/17/2005,
Contact: Dr. Terry Roberts 409–766–
3035.
EIS No. 20050377, Draft EIS, COE, NY,
Montuak Point Storm Damage
Reduction Project, Proposed
Reinforcement of an Existing Stone
Revetment Wall, Suffolk County, NY,
Comment Period Ends: 10/31/2005
Contact: Dr. Christopher Ricciardi
917–790–8630.
EIS No. 20050378, Draft EIS, COE, NJ,
Liberty State Park Ecosystem
Restoration Project, Hudson Raritan
Estuary Study, To Address the
Adverse Impacts Associated with Past
Filling Activities, Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey, Jersey
City, Hudson County, NJ , Comment
Period Ends: 10/24/2005, Contact:
Robert Will 917–790–8635. Revision
to FR Notice Published on 9/16/2005:
Due to an Administrative Error by the
U.S. Army COE the above Draft EIS
was not properly filed with the U.S.
EPA. COE has confirmed that
distribution of the Draft EIS was made
available to all Federal Agencies and
interested parties for the 45-day
review period that will end on 10/24/
2005.
Amended Notices
EIS No. 20050291, Final EIS, AFS, CO,
Gold Camp Road Plan, Develop a
Feasible Plan to Manage the
Operation of Tunnel #3 and the 8.5
mile Road Segment, Pike National
Forest, Pikes Peak Ranger District,
Colorado Springs, El Paso County,
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
CO, Wait Period Ends: 11/07/2005,
Contact: Frank Landis 719–477–4203.
Revision to FR Notice Published on
7/22/2005. Refiling of Final EIS Per
Agencies Request, the Wait Period
will End on 11/07/2005.
EIS No. 20050292, Draft EIS, USA, HI,
Makua Military Reservation (MMR)
Project, Proposed Military Training
Activities, 25th Infantry Division
(Light) and U.S. Army, HI, Comment
Period Ends: 10/06/2005, Contact:
Gary Shirakata 808–438–0772.
Revision to FR Notice Published on
7/22/2005. Extending the Comment
Period from 9/21/2005 to 10/06/2005.
EIS No. 20050298, Draft EIS, AFS, UT,
West Bear Vegetation Management
Project, Timber Harvesting, Prescribed
Burning, Roads Construction,
Township 1 North, Range 9 East, Salt
Lake Principle Meridian, Evanston
Ranger District, Wasatch-Cache
National Forest, Summit County, UT,
Comment Period Ends: 09/30/2005,
Contact: Larry Johnson 307–789–
3194. Revision of FR Notice Published
on 7/22/2005. Extending the
Comment Period from 9/06/2005 to
9/30/2005.
EIS No. 20050351, Draft EIS, SFW, CA,
East Contra Costa County Habitat
Conservation Plan and Natural
Community Conservation Plan,
Implementation, Incidental Take
Permit, Cities of Brentwood, Clayton,
Oakley and Pittsburg, Contra Costa
County, CA, Comment Period Ends:
12/01/2005, Contact: Sheila Larsen
916–444–6600. Revision to FR Notice
Published on 9/2/2005. Comment
Period Extended from 10/17/2005 to
12/01/2005.
Dated: September 13, 2005.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05–18429 Filed 9–15–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[OPPT–2002–0001; FRL–7738–5]
National Pollution Prevention and
Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC);
Interim Ad Hoc Nanotechnology Work
Group; Notice of Public Meeting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S. App. 2
(Public Law 92–463), EPA gives notice
of an all day meeting of the National
E:\FR\FM\16SEN1.SGM
16SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 179 (Friday, September 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54739-54740]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18428]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-6667-5]
Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of
EPA Comments
Availability of EPA comments prepared 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 1, 2005 (70 FR
16815).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20050202, ERP No. D-CGD-A03086-00, Programmatic--Vessel and
Facility Response Plans for Oil: 2003 Removal Equipment Requirements
and Alternative Technology Revisions, To Increase the Oil Removal
Capability, U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), United States, Alaska,
Guam, Puerto Rico and other U.S. Territories.
Summary: EPA expressed concerns related to the synergistic effects
of chemical dispersants with oil on water quality and organisms within
the water column, spill modeling, and model limitations for the fate
and effect of chemically dispersed oil.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050235, ERP No. D-NPS-F65057-IN, Lincoln Boyhood National
Memorial General Management Plan, Implementation, Lincoln City, Spencer
County, IN.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050266, ERP No. D-DOE-A00171-00, Proposed Consolidation of
Nuclear Operations Related to Production of radioisotope Power Systems,
Located or Planned Sites: Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL),
Tennessee; Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), New Mexico; and the
Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Idaho, TN, NM, ID.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050310, ERP No. D-JUS-G81013-TX, Laredo Detention Facility,
Proposed Contractor-Owned/Contractor-Operated Detention Facility,
Implementation, Webb County, TX.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050300, ERP No. DS-NOA-E55555-00, Reef Fish (Amendment 25)
and Coastal Migratory Pelagic (Amendment 17) for Extending the Charter
Vessel/Headboat Permit Moratorium, Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic.
Summary: EPA agrees with the extension of the permit moratorium,
but recommended that any available moratorium data be evaluated and
summarized in the FSEIS as part of the decision-making process.
Rating LO
Final EISs
EIS No. 20050270, ERP No. F-NRC-E06024-AL, Generic--License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants for Browns Ferry, Unit 1, 2 and 33 (TAC Nos. MC7168,
MC1769, and MC1770), Supplement 21 to NUREG-1437, Implementation,
Athens, AL.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns because of the
uncertainty of the ultimate location of a permitted repository site for
the radioactive waste.
EIS No. 20050317, ERP No. F-NAS-E12007-FL, New Horizons Mission to
Pluto, Continued Preparations and Implementation to Explore Pluto and
Potentially the Recently Discovered Kuiper Belt, Cape Canaveral Air
Force Station, FL.
Summary: EPA's previous issues have been resolved therefore, EPA
has no objection to the proposed action.
EIS No. 20050334, ERP No. F-DOE-J91000-MT, South Fork Flathead
Watershed Westslope Cutthroat Trout Conservation Program, Preserve the
[[Page 54740]]
Genetic Purity of the Westslope Cutthroat Trout Population, Flathead
National Forest, Flathead River, Flathead, Powell and Missoula
Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential
impacts to aquatic ecosystem integrity, particularly effects to non-
target species, and ecological impacts of restocking historically
fishless lakes. EPA emphasizes the need to follow strict pesticide
application protocols with appropriate management and mitigation
measures, and establishment of a comprehensive monitoring and adaptive
management program to minimize ecological and public health risks
during project implementation.
EIS No. 20050335, ERP No. FS-AFS-J65419-MT, Gallatin National Forest,
Updated Information, Replaces the Effects Analysis for the Northern
Goshawk in the Main Boulder Fuels Reduction Project (FEIS),
Implementation, Gallatin National Forest, Big Timber Ranger District,
Sweetgrass and Park Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed action and supports
the proposed ecological effects monitoring.
Dated: September 13, 2005.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05-18428 Filed 9-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
