Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 32085-32086 [E6-8593]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Notices jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES notice appears in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 307 of the Act. The Administrator’s action amending the February 18, 2005 Order on Kodak is not subject to judicial review, as no portions of the original citizen petition were denied. ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final order, the petition, and all relevant information at the EPA Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007–1866. If you wish to examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before visiting day. Additionally, the final order for G–P Gypsum is available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/ region07/programs/artd/air/title5/ petitiondb/petitiondb2002.htm, and the amended Kodak order is available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/ region07/programs/artd/air/title5/ petitiondb/petitiondb2003.htm. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Riva, Chief, Permitting Section, Air Programs Branch, Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, EPA, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007– 1866, telephone (212) 637–4074. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to review, and object to as appropriate, operating permits proposed by State permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator within 60 days after the expiration of this review period to object to State operating permits if EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the State, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues during the comment period or the grounds for the issues arose after this period. I. G–P Gypsum Corporation On September 15, 2005, the EPA received a petition from SJEJA, requesting that EPA object to the issuance of the title V operating permit for G–P Gypsum based on the following allegations: (1) The draft permit was not accompanied by a statement of basis explaining various permitting decisions, particularly eight monitoring provisions that NJDEP added after the close of public comment; (2) the facility should have filed a compliance plan and the permit should have contained a compliance schedule; (3) the permit fails to address past violations; (4) the permit has inadequate monitoring and reporting provisions; (5) NJDEP failed to VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:05 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 ensure safe ambient air quality levels in the Camden area; and (6) NJDEP did not adequately address environmental justice issues. On April 4, 2006, the Administrator issued an order partially granting and partially denying the petition on G–P Gypsum. The order explains the reasons behind EPA’s conclusion that the NJDEP must re-issue the statement of basis to provide an explanation for the eight monitoring provisions added after the close of the public comment period. The order also explains the reasons for denying SJEJA’s remaining claims. II. Kodak Park On August 16, 2005, the EPA received a letter from NYSDEC, requesting that EPA reconsider certain revisions to the Kodak Park Facility’s operating permit, mandated by the Administrator’s February 18, 2005 Order. This Order granted in part and denied in part a petition filed by the New York Public Interest Research Group, asking EPA to object to the Kodak Park Facility(s operating permit. In its letter, NYSDEC sought reconsideration of EPA’s objections for the following reasons: (1) The actual annual quantity of benzene in facility waste is very low compared to the permitted cap; (2) the standard test method for volatile organic compounds (VOC) in coatings and fountain solutions is burdensome and yields unreliable results, and actual VOC levels are low compared to permitted levels; and (3) frequent monitoring on several small cold cleaning units is overly burdensome. On April 4, 2006, the Administrator issued an amended order, granting the request for reconsideration on Kodak Park. The amended Order explains the reasons behind EPA’s decision to provide the NYSDEC with some flexibility in resolving EPA’s February 18, 2005 objections regarding these three issues. The amended Order also explains why EPA believes there continue to be sufficient bases on which to grant the citizen petition on these issues. Dated: May 22, 2006. Alan J. Steinberg, Regional Administrator, Region 2. [FR Doc. E6–8617 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 32085 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–6675–8] 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 7, 2006 (71 FR 17845). Draft EISs EIS No. 20060034, ERP No. D–NRC– F06028–MN, GENERIC—License Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Supplement 26 to NUREG 1437, Regarding Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (TAC NO. MC6441) Renewal of Operating License DRP–22 for Additional 20-Years of Operation, Mississippi River, City of Monticello, Wright County, MN. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about radiological impacts and risk estimates, future up rates, spent fuel storage facilities, and abnormal effluent releases. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20060077, ERP No. D–COE– E36184–FL, Central and Southern Florida Project, New Authorization for Broward County Water Preserve Areas, South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, (CERP), Broward County, FL. Summary: EPA fully supports the restoration components of the project and its expedited implementation. EPA requested quantification of water quality benefits and an exotics management plan. Rating EC1. EIS No. 20060089, ERP No. DS–AFS– L65400–ID, West Gold Creek Project, Updated Information, Forest Management Activities Plan, Implementation, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Sandpoints Ranger District, Bonner County, ID. Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential adverse impacts to water E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1 32086 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 106 / Friday, June 2, 2006 / Notices quality and on the bull trout spawning area under the preferred alternative. The Final EIS should evaluate additional reductions in sediment loading to West Gold Creek. Rating EC2. Final EISs EIS No. 20060112, ERP No. F–OSM– D36120–PA, ADOPTION—Dents Run Watershed Ecosystem Restoration, Construction and Operation of Six Acid Mine Drainage Abatement Projects, Implementation, Benezette Township, Susquehanna River Basin, Elk County, PA. Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. EIS No. 20060116, ERP No. F–NPS– F65076–OH, First Ladies National Historic Site General Management Plan, Implementation, Canton, OH. Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action. EIS No. 20060129, ERP No. F–FRC– E03014–FL, Cypress Pipeline Project and Phase VII Expansion Project, Construction and Operation, U.S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, Northern and Central Florida. Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about impacts to wetland. EIS No. 20060134, ERP No. F–SFW– K99034–CA, Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains Trails Plan, Issuance of Incidental Take Permit, Riverside County, CA. Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action. Dated: May 30, 2006. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E6–8593 Filed 6–1–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER–FRL–6675–7] jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES 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 May 22, 2006 through May 26, 2006 pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:05 Jun 01, 2006 Jkt 208001 EIS No. 20060217, Final Supplement, COE, IL, Upper Des Plaines River, Proposed Flood Damage Reduction (Site 37 on Upper Des Plaines River), Prospect Heights, Cook County, IL, Wait Period Ends: June 26, 2006, Contact: Keith Ryder 312–846–5587 The above EIS should have appeared in FR on May 26, 2006 the Wait Period is Calculated from May 26, 2006. EIS No. 20060218, Draft EIS, FHW, NY, Williamsville Toll Barrier Improvement Project, Improvements from New York Thruway, Interstate 90 between Interchange 48A and 50, Funding, Erie and Genesee Counties, NY, Comment Period Ends: July 17, 2006, Contact: Amy Jackson-Grove 518–431–4125. EIS No. 20060219, Final EIS, COE, VA, Craney Island Eastward Expansion, Construction of a 580-acre Eastward Expansion of the Existing Dredged Material Management Area, Port of Hampton Roads, Norfolk Harbor and Channels, VA, Wait Period Ends: July 3, 2006, Contact: Craig Seltzer 757– 201–7390. EIS No. 20060220, Draft EIS, BLM, ID, Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area, Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Ada, Canyon, Elmore, Owyhee Counties, ID, Comment Period Ends: August 17, 2006, Contact: Mike O’Donnell 208–384–3315. EIS No. 20060221, Draft EIS, CGD, MA, Neptune Liquefied Natural Gas Deepwater Port License Application, Proposes to Construct, Own and Operate a Deepwater Port, northeast of Boston and south-southeast of Gloucester, MA, Comment Period Ends: July 17, 2006, Contact: M.A. Prescott 202–372–1451. EIS No. 20060222, Draft EIS, COE, 00, Kansas Citys, Missouri and Kansas Flood Damage Reduction Study, Improvements to the Existing Line of Protection, Birmingham, Jackson, Clay Counties, MO and Wyandotte County, KS, Comment Period Ends: July 17, 2006, Contact: Christopher M. White 816–389–3158. EIS No. 20060223, Draft EIS, FRC, 00, Carthage to Perryville Project, Construction and Operation of a Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission, Located in various counties and parishes in eastern Texas and northern Louisiana, Comment Period Ends: July 17, 2006, Contact: Todd Sedmak 1–866–208–3372. EIS No. 20060224, Final EIS, GSA, WA, Peace Arch Port of Entry Redevelopment Project, Improvements to Security, Safety and PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Functionality, Canadian Border in Blaine, Whatcom County, WA, Wait Period Ends: July 3, 2006, Contact: Michael Levine 253–931–7263. EIS No. 20060225, Final EIS, BLM, NV, Sheep Complex, Big Springs and Owyhee Grazing Allotments Sensitive Bird Species Project, Determine Impacts of Livestock Grazing, Elko County, NV, Wait Period Ends: July 3, 2006, Contact: Bryan Fuell 775–753– 0200. EIS No. 20060226, Final EIS, FHW, CA, Lincoln Bypass Construction, South of Industrial Boulevard to North of Riosa Road, Funding and U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit, Issuance, Placer County, CA, Wait Period Ends: July 5, 2006, Contact: Maiser Khaled 916–498–5020. EIS No. 20060227, Draft EIS, COE, 00, White River Minimum Flood Study, Manages the Water and Land Areas at Five Reservoirs: Beaver, Table Rock, Bull Shoals, Norfork and Greers Ferry, Little Rock District, AR and MO, Comment Period Ends: July 17, 2006, Contact: Mike Biggs 501–324–5842. EIS No. 20060228, Final Supplement, COE, MA, Boston Harbor Inner Harbor Maintenance Dredging Project, Updated Information, Boston Harbor, Mystic River and Chelsea River, MA, Wait Period Ends: July 3, 2006, Contact: Michael F. Keegan 978–318– 8087. Amended Notices EIS No. 20060132, Draft EIS, AFS, ID, White/White Analysis Project, Proposes Vegetative Management and Watershed Improvement, Lolo Creek, Chamook Creek, White Creek, Mike White Creek, Nevada Creek, and Utah Creek, Lochsa Ranger District, Clearwater National Forest, Idaho and Clearwater County, ID, Comment Period Ends: June 15, 2006, Contact: Steve Bess 208–926–4274. Revision to FR Notice Published April 14, 2006: Comment Period Extended from May 30, 2006 to June 15, 2006. EIS No. 20060183, Final EIS, FAA, UT, St. George Municipal Airport Replacement, Funding, City of St. George, Washington County, UT, Wait Period Ends: July 3, 2006, Contact: T.J. Stetz 425–227–2611. Revision to Federal Register Notice Published May 19, 2006: Wait Period Extend from June 19, 2006 to July 3, 2006. EIS No. 20060190, Final EIS, AFS, MI, Ottawa National Forest, Proposed Land and Resource Management Plan, Forest Plan Revision, Implementation, Baraga, Gogebic, Houghton, Iron, Marquette and Ontonagan Counties, E:\FR\FM\02JNN1.SGM 02JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 106 (Friday, June 2, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32085-32086]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8593]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6675-8]


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 7, 2006 (71 FR 17845).

Draft EISs

EIS No. 20060034, ERP No. D-NRC-F06028-MN, GENERIC--License Renewal of 
Nuclear Plants, Supplement 26 to NUREG 1437, Regarding Monticello 
Nuclear Generating Plant (TAC NO. MC6441) Renewal of Operating License 
DRP-22 for Additional 20-Years of Operation, Mississippi River, City of 
Monticello, Wright County, MN.

    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about radiological 
impacts and risk estimates, future up rates, spent fuel storage 
facilities, and abnormal effluent releases.

Rating EC2.

EIS No. 20060077, ERP No. D-COE-E36184-FL, Central and Southern Florida 
Project, New Authorization for Broward County Water Preserve Areas, 
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), Comprehensive 
Everglades Restoration Plan, (CERP), Broward County, FL.

    Summary: EPA fully supports the restoration components of the 
project and its expedited implementation. EPA requested quantification 
of water quality benefits and an exotics management plan.

Rating EC1.

EIS No. 20060089, ERP No. DS-AFS-L65400-ID, West Gold Creek Project, 
Updated Information, Forest Management Activities Plan, Implementation, 
Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Sandpoints Ranger District, Bonner 
County, ID.

    Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about the potential 
adverse impacts to water

[[Page 32086]]

quality and on the bull trout spawning area under the preferred 
alternative. The Final EIS should evaluate additional reductions in 
sediment loading to West Gold Creek.

Rating EC2.

Final EISs

EIS No. 20060112, ERP No. F-OSM-D36120-PA, ADOPTION--Dents Run 
Watershed Ecosystem Restoration, Construction and Operation of Six Acid 
Mine Drainage Abatement Projects, Implementation, Benezette Township, 
Susquehanna River Basin, Elk County, PA.

    Summary: No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency.

EIS No. 20060116, ERP No. F-NPS-F65076-OH, First Ladies National 
Historic Site General Management Plan, Implementation, Canton, OH.

    Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action.

EIS No. 20060129, ERP No. F-FRC-E03014-FL, Cypress Pipeline Project and 
Phase VII Expansion Project, Construction and Operation, U.S. Army COE 
Section 10 and 404 Permits, Northern and Central Florida.

    Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about impacts 
to wetland.

EIS No. 20060134, ERP No. F-SFW-K99034-CA, Coachella Valley Multiple 
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), Santa Rosa and San Jacinto 
Mountains Trails Plan, Issuance of Incidental Take Permit, Riverside 
County, CA.

    Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action.


    Dated: May 30, 2006.
Robert W. Hargrove,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
 [FR Doc. E6-8593 Filed 6-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.