Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 67165-67166 [05-22041]

Download as PDF 67165 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Notices TABLE.—ESTIMATED BURDEN TO PARTICIPANTS—Continued Office Topics to include Number of focus groups Number of participants per focus group Average length of focus group (1) Office of Air and Radiation. Office of Radiation and Indoor Air ................. (2) (3) (4) (5) Office of Transportation and Air Quality ........ Office of Water ............................................... Total ................................................. Environmental management of asthma; Indoor air quality management in schools and large buildings, etc. Encouraging fuel efficiency through labeling (Smartway brand), etc. Invasive species prevention; Great Lakes, etc. 6 4 4 9 2 60 9 3 188 ........................................................................ 20 *1758 **2.4 *Total needed for all focus groups [sum[col (3)*(4)]]. **Average time for all focus groups [cols. (3)*(5)/188]. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Dated: September 26, 2005. Al McGartland, Office Director, National Center for Environmental Economics, Office of Policy, Economics and Innovation. [FR Doc. 05–22035 Filed 11–3–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–6669–1] 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 22:35 Nov 03, 2005 Jkt 208001 statements (EISs) was published in FR dated April 1, 2005 (70 FR 16815). Draft EISs EIS No. 20050220, ERP No. D–FHW– L40227–WA, Interstate 90 Snoqualmie Pass East Project, Proposes to Improve a 15-mile Portion of I–90 from Milepost 55.10 in Hyak to Milepost 70.3 New Easton, Funding, U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit and NPDES Permit, Kittitas County, WA. Summary: EPA has environmental objections about the proposed project primarily related to the adequacy of the ecological connectivity options presented. EPA notes that no preferred alternative was selected and the most substantial environmental issues relate to the No Action Alternative and Ecological Connectivity Improvement Package C. Rating EO2. EIS No. 20050354, ERP No. D–UAF– E11057–00, Shaw Air Base Airspace Training Initiative (ATI), 20th Fighter Wing Proposal to Modify the Training Airspace Overlying Parts, South Carolina and Georgia Summary: EPA expressed concern about airspace management/ configuration/access around existing civilian airports in Georgia and ongoing coordination with the public regarding noise issues. Mitigation of some of the specific impacts can be accomplished via structuring the various training scenarios and modifying the proposed airspace to further avoid/minimize impacts around civilian airports. Rating EC1. EIS No. 20050368, ERP No. D–IBR– G28013–NM, Carlsbad Project Water Operations and Water Supply Conservation, Changes in Carlsbad Project Operations and Implementation of Water Acquisition Program, U.S. COE Section 404 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Permit, NPDES, Eddy, De Baca, Chaves, and Guadelupe Counties, NM. Summary: EPA had no objection to the selection of the preferred action. Rating LO. Final EISs EIS No. 20050344, ERP No. F–NRC– F06025–WI, Generic—License Renewal for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Supplement 23 to NUREG–1437 (TAC Nos. MC2049 and MC2050), Lake Michigan, Manitowoc County, WI. Summary: EPA continues to express concerns about the adequacy and clarity of the radiological impact assessments and risk estimates. EIS No. 20050373, ERP No. F–COE– H39012–MO, Howard Bend Floodplain Area Study, Improvements for Future Land, Future Road, and Stormwater Management, Missouri River Flood Developments, U.S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, St. Louis County, MO. Summary: EPA continued to express concerns about the cumulative effects analysis, including uncertainty over the potential for development within the levee-protected area and the reliance on potentially outdated FEMA profiles that may underestimate impacts. EIS No. 20050376, ERP No. F–COE– G32057–TX, CedarBayou Navigation Chanel (CBNC) Improvement Project, Implementation, Near Baytown in Harris and Chambers Counties, TX. Summary: No comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. EIS No. 20050419, ERP No. F–AFS– J65441–MT, Middle East Fork Hazardous Fuel Reduction Project, Implementation of Three Alternatives, Bitterroot National Forest, Sula Ranger District, Ravalli County, MT. E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM 04NON1 67166 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Notices Summary: EPA continues to express concerns about potential impacts to water quality. EPA stressed the importance of designing and implementing fuels reduction treatments and road access in a manner that minimizes impacts. EPA also recommended modification of mitigation measures to further assure protection for large old growth Ponderosa pine trees. Dated: November 1, 2005. Ken Mittelholtz, Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. 05–22041 Filed 11–3–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–6668–09] 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 October 24, 2005 Through October 28, 2005 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. EIS No. 20050450, Draft EIS, SFW, IL, Crab Orchard National Wildlife Refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), Implementation, Williamson, Jackson and Unicon Counties, IL, Comment Period Ends: January 17, 2006, Contact: Dan Frisk 618–997–3344. EIS No. 20050451, Final EIS, AFS, WA, Fish Passage and Aquatic Habitat Restoration at Hemlock Dam, Implementation, Gifford Pinchot National Forest, Mount Adams District, Skamaria County, WA, Wait Period Ends: December 5, 2005, Contact: Benet Coffin 509–395–3425. EIS No. 20050452, Draft EIS, BLM, NM, Kasha-Katuwe Tent Rocks National Monument Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Rio Puerco Field Office, Sandoval County, NM, Comment Period Ends: February 2, 2006, Contact: John Bristol 505–761– 8755. EIS No. 20050453, Draft EIS, AFS, ID, South Fork Salmon River Subbasin Noxious and Invasive Weed Management Program, Implementation, Krassel and McCall Ranger Districts, Payette National Forest and Cascade Ranger District, Valley and Idaho Counties, ID, Comment Period Ends: December 20, VerDate Aug<31>2005 22:35 Nov 03, 2005 Jkt 208001 2005, Contact: Ana Egnew 208–634– 0624. EIS No. 20050454, Final EIS, FRC, 00, Cove Point Expansion Project, Construction and Operation of a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Import Terminal Expansion and Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, US. Army COE Section 404 Permit, Docket Nos. CPO5–130–000, CP05–131–000 and CP05–132–00, PA, VA, WV, NY and MD, Wait Period Ends: December 21, 2005, Contact: Thomas Russo 1–866– 208–3372. EIS No. 20050455, Final EIS, AFS, IN, German Ridge Restoration Project, To Restore Native Hardwood Communities, Implementation, Hoosier National Forest, Tell City Ranger District, Perry County, IN, Wait Period Ends: December 5, 2005, Contact: Ron Ellis 812–275–5987. EIS No. 20050456, Final EIS, FHW, 00, US 24 Transportation Improvements Project, I–469 in New Haven, Indiana to Ohio Route15 in Defiance, Funding, NPDES Permit and U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit Issuance, Westenmost and Allen Counties, IN and Paulding and Defiance Counties, OH, Wait Period Ends: December 5, 2005, Contact: Mark Vonder Embse 614–280–6854. Amended Notices EIS No. 20050437, Final EIS, AFS, NM, Tajique Watershed Restoration Project, Proposes Fuel Reduction and Restore Forest Health, Cibola National Forest, Torrance County, NM, Wait Period Ends: November 21, 2005, Contact: Vicky Estrada 505–847–2990. Revision of FR Notice Published October 21, 2005: Correction to Title and Contact Person Name. EIS No. 20050446, Draft EIS, USN, 00, Undersea Warfare Training Range (USWTR), Installation and Operation, Preferred Site (in the Cherry Point Operating Area) and the Alternate Sites (within the Virginia Capes and Jacksonville Operating Areas), NC, VA and FL, Comment Period Ends: December 28, 2005, Contact: Keith Jenkins 757–322–4046. Revision of FR Notice Published on October 28, 2005: Comment Period Extended from December 12, 2005 to December 28, 2005. Dated: November 1, 2005. Ken Mittelholtz, Environmental Protection Specialist, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. 05–22040 Filed 11–3–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL–7994–2] Underground Injection Control Program; Hazardous Waste Injection Restrictions; Petition for Exemption— Class I Hazardous Waste Injection; Lyondell Chemical Company AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. Notice of Final Decision on No Migration Petition Reissuance. ACTION: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that an exemption to the land disposal restrictions under the 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act has been granted to Lyondell Industries, Inc. (Lyondell) for two Class I injection wells located at Channelview, Texas. As required by 40 CFR Part 148, the company has adequately demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Environmental Protection Agency by the petition and supporting documentation that, to a reasonable degree of certainty, there will be no migration of hazardous constituents from the injection zone for as long as the waste remains hazardous. This final decision allows the continued underground injection by Lyondell, of the specific restricted hazardous wastes identified in the exemption, into Class I hazardous waste injection wells WDW–148 and WDW–162, until December 31, 2020, unless EPA moves to terminate the exemption under provisions of 40 CFR 148.24. Additional conditions included in this final decision may be reviewed by contacting the Region 6 Ground Water/UIC Section. As required by 40 CFR 148.22(b) and 124.10, a public notice was issued August 18, 2005. The public comment period closed on October 3, 2005. No comments were received. This decision constitutes final Agency action. This action is effective as of October 28, 2005. DATES: Copies of the petition and all pertinent information relating thereto are on file at the following location: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Water Quality Protection Division, Source Water Protection Branch (6WQ-S), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Philip Dellinger, Chief Ground Water/ E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM 04NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 213 (Friday, November 4, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67165-67166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22041]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6669-1]


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. 20050220, ERP No. D-FHW-L40227-WA, Interstate 90 Snoqualmie 
Pass East Project, Proposes to Improve a 15-mile Portion of I-90 from 
Milepost 55.10 in Hyak to Milepost 70.3 New Easton, Funding, U.S. Army 
COE Section 404 Permit and NPDES Permit, Kittitas County, WA.

    Summary: EPA has environmental objections about the proposed 
project primarily related to the adequacy of the ecological 
connectivity options presented. EPA notes that no preferred alternative 
was selected and the most substantial environmental issues relate to 
the No Action Alternative and Ecological Connectivity Improvement 
Package C.
    Rating EO2.

EIS No. 20050354, ERP No. D-UAF-E11057-00, Shaw Air Base Airspace 
Training Initiative (ATI), 20th Fighter Wing Proposal to Modify the 
Training Airspace Overlying Parts, South Carolina and Georgia

    Summary: EPA expressed concern about airspace management/
configuration/access around existing civilian airports in Georgia and 
ongoing coordination with the public regarding noise issues. Mitigation 
of some of the specific impacts can be accomplished via structuring the 
various training scenarios and modifying the proposed airspace to 
further avoid/minimize impacts around civilian airports.
    Rating EC1.

EIS No. 20050368, ERP No. D-IBR-G28013-NM, Carlsbad Project Water 
Operations and Water Supply Conservation, Changes in Carlsbad Project 
Operations and Implementation of Water Acquisition Program, U.S. COE 
Section 404 Permit, NPDES, Eddy, De Baca, Chaves, and Guadelupe 
Counties, NM.
    Summary: EPA had no objection to the selection of the preferred 
action.
    Rating LO.

Final EISs

EIS No. 20050344, ERP No. F-NRC-F06025-WI, Generic--License Renewal for 
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Supplement 23 to NUREG-1437 
(TAC Nos. MC2049 and MC2050), Lake Michigan, Manitowoc County, WI.
    Summary: EPA continues to express concerns about the adequacy and 
clarity of the radiological impact assessments and risk estimates.

EIS No. 20050373, ERP No. F-COE-H39012-MO, Howard Bend Floodplain Area 
Study, Improvements for Future Land, Future Road, and Stormwater 
Management, Missouri River Flood Developments, U.S. Army COE Section 10 
and 404 Permits, St. Louis County, MO.
    Summary: EPA continued to express concerns about the cumulative 
effects analysis, including uncertainty over the potential for 
development within the levee-protected area and the reliance on 
potentially outdated FEMA profiles that may underestimate impacts.

EIS No. 20050376, ERP No. F-COE-G32057-TX, CedarBayou Navigation Chanel 
(CBNC) Improvement Project, Implementation, Near Baytown in Harris and 
Chambers Counties, TX.
    Summary: No comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

EIS No. 20050419, ERP No. F-AFS-J65441-MT, Middle East Fork Hazardous 
Fuel Reduction Project, Implementation of Three Alternatives, 
Bitterroot National Forest, Sula Ranger District, Ravalli County, MT.

[[Page 67166]]

    Summary: EPA continues to express concerns about potential impacts 
to water quality. EPA stressed the importance of designing and 
implementing fuels reduction treatments and road access in a manner 
that minimizes impacts. EPA also recommended modification of mitigation 
measures to further assure protection for large old growth Ponderosa 
pine trees.

    Dated: November 1, 2005.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 05-22041 Filed 11-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.