Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 58698-58699 [05-20207]
Download as PDF
58698
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 1,
2005.
James N. Solit,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 05–20256 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Office of Environmental Management;
Notice of Availability of Draft Section
3116 Determination Concerning
Disposal of Residual Tank Wastes in
Tanks 18 and 19 at the Savannah River
Site
Office of Environmental
Management, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE) announces the availability of a
draft determination concerning the
permanent, in-situ disposal of residual
tank wastes (including tank structure
and equipment) in liquid radioactive
waste tanks 18 and 19 at the F-Tank
Farm (FTF) at the Savannah River Site
(SRS) near Aiken, South Carolina. DOE
prepared the draft determination
pursuant to Section 3116 of the Ronald
W. Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005,
which authorizes the Secretary of
Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, to determine
that certain waste from reprocessing is
not high-level waste (HLW) if the
provisions set forth in section 3116 are
satisfied. Although not required by the
Act, DOE is making the draft
determination available for public
review and comment.
DATES: The comment period will end on
November 21, 2005. Comments received
after this date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: The draft waste
determination is available on the
Internet at https://apps.em.doe.gov/swd,
and is publicly available for review at
the following locations: U.S.
Department of Energy, Public Reading
Room, 1000 Independence Avenue,
SW., Washington, DC 20585, Phone:
(202) 586–5955, or Fax: (202) 586–0575;
and U.S. Department of Energy,
Savannah River Operations Office,
Public Reading Room, 171 University
Parkway, Aiken, SC 29801, Phone: (803)
641–3320, or Fax: (803) 641–3302.
Written comments should be addressed
to: Mr. Matthew Duchesne, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of
Environmental Management, EM–2,
1000 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585. Alternatively,
comments can be filed electronically by
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:27 Oct 06, 2005
Jkt 208001
e-mail to
matthew.duchesne@em.doe.gov, or by
Fax at (202) 586–4314.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since
1954, SRS Tank Farms F and H have
received over 140 million gallons (Mgal)
of waste from SRS nuclear material
processing facilities. Much of this waste
resulted from the reprocessing of spent
nuclear fuel for defense purposes,
which has been commingled with nonreprocessing waste. The waste tanks
contain two distinct types of radioactive
waste material, approximately 3 Mgal of
radioactive sludge and approximately
34 Mgal of salt waste. DOE’s plans call
for stabilizing and disposing of retrieved
sludge in a deep geologic repository for
spent nuclear fuel and high-level
radioactive waste. Regarding the salt
waste, DOE contemplates removing
fission products and actinides from
these materials using a variety of
technologies and solidifying the
remaining low-activity salt stream into a
grout matrix, known as saltstone grout,
suitable for disposal in vaults at the
Saltstone Disposal Waste Determination.
This Determination addresses only
the permanent disposal of the residual
materials contaminating Tank 18 and
Tank 19, as well as the structure of the
tanks themselves and ancillary
equipment. Both tanks have a nominal
operating capacity of 1.3 Mgal. Waste
removal operations for Tank 18 were
initiated in 1985 and completed in
2003. Tank 18 now holds approximately
4.3 thousand gallons (Kgal) of residual
material. Waste removal operations for
Tank 19 were initiated in 1981 and
completed in 2001, and it now holds
approximately 15.1 Kgal of residual
material. DOE plans to fill both tanks
with a reducing grout designed to
stabilize and solidify the residual
material. This method was chosen as the
least hazardous and most
environmentally preferable alternative.
It will reduce migration of contaminants
into the environment; prevent
inadvertent intrusion; minimize freestanding liquids; and minimize void
spaces in the tank. After final pouring
of the stabilizing grout, a layer of higherstrength grout will be poured into the
tanks to further discourage human/
animal inadvertent intrusion. In
addition, institutional controls (access
restriction and groundwater monitoring)
will be implemented and maintained in
accordance with Federal and State
agreements.
Final Determination: Section 3116
authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), to
determine that certain waste from
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
reprocessing is not HLW if the
provisions set forth in Section 3116 are
satisfied. DOE will issue a final waste
determination for Tanks 18 and 19
following the completion of
consultation with the NRC, and
consideration of any public comments.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 3,
2005.
Mark A. Gilbertson,
Deputy Assistant, Secretary for
Environmental Cleanup and Acceleration.
[FR Doc. 05–20257 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–6668–2]
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 the
Federal Register dated April 1, 2005 (70
FR 16815).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20050066, ERP No. D–FAA–
B40165–MA, New Bedford Regional
Airport Improvements Project, To
Enhance Aviation Capacity, Air
Traffic, Jet Traffic, Air Cargo and
General Aviation Traffic,
Southeastern Massachusetts Region,
City of New Bedford, Bristol County,
MA.
Summary: EPA commented on the
lack of information to characterize the
severity of adverse direct and indirect
impacts to wetlands, and encouraged
the FAA to consider enhancement of a
less damaging runway safety area
alternative. The comments also
requested a mitigation plan to
compensate for unavoidable losses at
wetlands.
Rating EO2
EIS No. 20050137, ERP No. D–AFS–
B65013–VT, Green Mountain National
Forest, Propose Revised Land and
Resource Management Plan,
Implementation, Forest Plan Revision,
Addison, Bennington, Rutland,
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Notices
Washington, Windham and Windsor
Counties, VT.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed project, but supports
alternatives C, D or E as those that best
address resource protection.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050226, ERP No. D–FHW–
B40095–RI, U.S. Route 6/Route 10
Interchange Improvement Project, To
Identify Transportation Alternative,
Funding, City of Providence,
Providence County, RI.
Summary: EPA has environmental
concerns about the impacts to water and
air quality as well as environmental
justice issues.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050247, ERP No. D–SFW–
K64025–AZ, Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge, Comprehensive
Conservation Plan, Wilderness
Stewardship Plan, Implementation,
Ajo, AZ.
Summary: EPA has no objection to the
proposed project.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050256, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65446–MT, Beaverhead-Deerlodge
National Forest Draft Revised Land
and Resource Management Plan,
Implementation, Beaverhead, ButteSilver Bow, Deerlodge, Granite,
Jefferson, Madison Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA generally supports the
forestwide aquatic strategy, watershed
restoration and revised management
practices. However, EPA expressed
environmental concerns about
continued impacts to water quality, the
level of watershed protection and
restoration, management direction for
roads and other resources, and
environmental protection management
measures.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050301, ERP No. D–FAA–
A12043–00, PROGRAMMATIC—
Horizontal Launch and Reentry of
Reentry Vehicles, Facilitate the
Issuance of Licenses in United States.
Summary: EPA has no objection to the
proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050315, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65449–UT, Fishlake National Forest
Off-Highway Vehicle Route
Designation Project, Proposes to
Designate a System of Motorized
Road, Trails, and Areas to Revise and
Update the Existing Motorized Travel
Plan, UT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:27 Oct 06, 2005
Jkt 208001
preferred alternative because of
potential adverse impacts to source
water, streams and water quality,
wetlands and aquatic resources. EPA
supports the transition from unmanaged
motorized recreation to restricted travel
and suggests the final EIS include
specific analyses of the direct, indirect
and cumulative impacts of this
proposed plan.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050240, ERP No. DS–FTA–
B54007–WA, Silver Line Phase III
(previously known as South Boston
Pier) Project, Updated Information to
Physically Integrate Silver Line Phase
I and II, Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority’s, Funding,
MA.
Summary: EPA has no objections to
the proposed project.
Rating LO
Final EISs
EIS No. 20050341, ERP No. F–COE–
G32058–00, Arkansas River
Navigation Study, To Maintain and
Improve the Navigation Channel in
Order to Enhance Commercial
Navigation on the McCellan Kerr
Arkansa River Navigation System
(MKARNS), Several Counties, AR and
Several Counties, OK.
Summary: No formal comment letter
was sent to the preparing agency.
Dated: October 4, 2005.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05–20207 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–U
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–6668–1]
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 09/26/2005 Through 09/30/2005
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
EIS No. 20050401, Draft Supplement,
SFW, CA, Southern Sea Otters
(Enhydra lutris nereis) Translocation
Program, New and Updated
Information, San Nicolas Island,
Southern California Bight, CA,
Comment Period Ends: 01/05/2006,
Contact: Greg Sander 805–644–1766
Ext. 315.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
58699
EIS No. 20050402, Final EIS, FHW, UT,
Iron County Transportation Corridors,
Construction from Station Road 56 to
Exit 51 on Interstate 15, Funding and
Right-of-Way Grant, Southwest of the
Cedar City Limits, Iron County, UT,
Wait Period Ends: 11/07/2005,
Contact: Gregory S. Punske 801–963–
0182.
EIS No. 20050403, Final EIS, AFS, CA,
Watdog Project, Proposes to Reduce
Fire Hazards, Harvest Trees, Using
Group Selection Methods, Feather
River Ranger District, Plumas
National Forest, Butte and Plumas
Counties, CA, Wait Period Ends: 11/
07/2005, Contact: Susan Joyce 530–
532–6500.
EIS No. 20050404, Draft EIS, DOI, OH,
First Ladies National Historic Site
General Management Plan,
Implementation, Canton, OH,
Comment Period Ends: 11/30/2005,
Contact: Nick Chevance 402–661–
1844.
EIS No. 20050405, Draft EIS, NPS, NV,
Clean Water Coalition Systems
Conveyance and Operations Program,
Construction, Operation and
Maintenance, City of Las Vegas, City
County, NV, Comment Period Ends:
12/06/2005, Contact: Michael Boyles
702–293–8978.
EIS No. 20050406, Draft EIS, FHW, WA,
South Park Bridge Project, Proposes to
Rehabilitate or Replace the Historic
South Park Ridge over the Duwamish
Waterway at 14th/16 Avenue S, U.S.
Coast Guard Permit and U.S. Army
COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, King
County, WA, Comment Period Ends: ,
11/21/2005, Contact: Jim Leonard
360–753–9408.
EIS No. 20050407, Final EIS, NPS, AZ,
Saguaro National Park Fire
Management Plan, Implementation,
Tucson, AZ, Wait Period Ends: 11/07/
2005, Contact: Sarah Craighead 520–
733–5101.
EIS No. 20050408, Final EIS, FHW, WI,
US 41 Highway Corridor Project,
Transportation Improvement between
the Cities of Oconto and Perhtigo,
Funding, Marinette and Oconto
Counties, WI, Wait Period Ends: 11/
07/2005, Contact: Johhny Gerbitz
608–829–7500.
EIS No. 20050409, Final EIS, AFS, OR,
Joseph Creek Rangeland Analysis
Project, Proposal to Allocate Forage
for Commercial Livestock Grazing on
Eleven Allotment, Wallowa-Whitman
National Forests, Wallowa Valley
Ranger District, Wallowa County, OR,
Wait Period Ends: 11/07/2005,
Contact: Alicia Glassford 541–426–
5689.
EIS No. 20050411, Draft EIS, IBR, CA,
Central Valley Project, West San
E:\FR\FM\07OCN1.SGM
07OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 194 (Friday, October 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58698-58699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20207]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-6668-2]
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 the Federal Register dated
April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815).
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20050066, ERP No. D-FAA-B40165-MA, New Bedford Regional Airport
Improvements Project, To Enhance Aviation Capacity, Air Traffic, Jet
Traffic, Air Cargo and General Aviation Traffic, Southeastern
Massachusetts Region, City of New Bedford, Bristol County, MA.
Summary: EPA commented on the lack of information to characterize
the severity of adverse direct and indirect impacts to wetlands, and
encouraged the FAA to consider enhancement of a less damaging runway
safety area alternative. The comments also requested a mitigation plan
to compensate for unavoidable losses at wetlands.
Rating EO2
EIS No. 20050137, ERP No. D-AFS-B65013-VT, Green Mountain National
Forest, Propose Revised Land and Resource Management Plan,
Implementation, Forest Plan Revision, Addison, Bennington, Rutland,
[[Page 58699]]
Washington, Windham and Windsor Counties, VT.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed project, but
supports alternatives C, D or E as those that best address resource
protection.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050226, ERP No. D-FHW-B40095-RI, U.S. Route 6/Route 10
Interchange Improvement Project, To Identify Transportation
Alternative, Funding, City of Providence, Providence County, RI.
Summary: EPA has environmental concerns about the impacts to water
and air quality as well as environmental justice issues.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050247, ERP No. D-SFW-K64025-AZ, Cabeza Prieta National
Wildlife Refuge, Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Wilderness
Stewardship Plan, Implementation, Ajo, AZ.
Summary: EPA has no objection to the proposed project.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050256, ERP No. D-AFS-J65446-MT, Beaverhead-Deerlodge
National Forest Draft Revised Land and Resource Management Plan,
Implementation, Beaverhead, Butte-Silver Bow, Deerlodge, Granite,
Jefferson, Madison Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA generally supports the forestwide aquatic strategy,
watershed restoration and revised management practices. However, EPA
expressed environmental concerns about continued impacts to water
quality, the level of watershed protection and restoration, management
direction for roads and other resources, and environmental protection
management measures.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050301, ERP No. D-FAA-A12043-00, PROGRAMMATIC--Horizontal
Launch and Reentry of Reentry Vehicles, Facilitate the Issuance of
Licenses in United States.
Summary: EPA has no objection to the proposed action.
Rating LO
EIS No. 20050315, ERP No. D-AFS-J65449-UT, Fishlake National Forest
Off-Highway Vehicle Route Designation Project, Proposes to Designate a
System of Motorized Road, Trails, and Areas to Revise and Update the
Existing Motorized Travel Plan, UT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the preferred
alternative because of potential adverse impacts to source water,
streams and water quality, wetlands and aquatic resources. EPA supports
the transition from unmanaged motorized recreation to restricted travel
and suggests the final EIS include specific analyses of the direct,
indirect and cumulative impacts of this proposed plan.
Rating EC2
EIS No. 20050240, ERP No. DS-FTA-B54007-WA, Silver Line Phase III
(previously known as South Boston Pier) Project, Updated Information to
Physically Integrate Silver Line Phase I and II, Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority's, Funding, MA.
Summary: EPA has no objections to the proposed project.
Rating LO
Final EISs
EIS No. 20050341, ERP No. F-COE-G32058-00, Arkansas River Navigation
Study, To Maintain and Improve the Navigation Channel in Order to
Enhance Commercial Navigation on the McCellan Kerr Arkansa River
Navigation System (MKARNS), Several Counties, AR and Several Counties,
OK.
Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.
Dated: October 4, 2005.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05-20207 Filed 10-6-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U