Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments, 19833-19834 [E8-7784]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 71 / Friday, April 11, 2008 / Notices
These rates will go into effect once the
Corps lifts the restrictions on the
operation of the Wolf Creek Dam and
the interim operating plan becomes
unnecessary.
The referenced repayment studies are
available for examination at 1166
Athens Tech Road, Elberton, Georgia
30635–6711. The Proposed Rate
Schedules CBR–1–G, CSI–1–G, CEK–1–
G, CM–1–G, CC–1–H, CK–1–G, and
CTV–1–G are also available.
Dated: March 31, 2008.
Leon Jourolmon,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8–7761 Filed 4–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
[ER–FRL–6697–8]
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.
Summary of Rating Definitions;
Environmental Impact of the Action
LO—Lack of Objections
The EPA review has not identified
any potential environmental impacts
requiring substantive changes to the
proposal. The review may have
disclosed opportunities for application
of mitigation measures that could be
accomplished with no more than minor
changes to the proposal.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
EC—Environmental Concerns
The EPA review has identified
environmental impacts that should be
avoided in order to fully protect the
environment. Corrective measures may
require changes to the preferred
alternative or application of mitigation
measures that can reduce the
environmental impact. EPA would like
to work with the lead agency to reduce
these impacts.
EO—Environmental Objections
The EPA review has identified
significant environmental impacts that
must be avoided in order to provide
adequate protection for the
environment. Corrective measures may
require substantial changes to the
19:21 Apr 10, 2008
Jkt 214001
EU—Environmentally Unsatisfactory
The EPA review has identified
adverse environmental impacts that are
of sufficient magnitude that they are
unsatisfactory from the standpoint of
public health or welfare or
environmental quality. EPA intends to
work with the lead agency to reduce
these impacts. If the potentially
unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected
at the final EIS stage, this proposal will
be recommended for referral to the CEQ.
Adequacy of the Impact Statement
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
VerDate Aug<31>2005
preferred alternative or consideration of
some other project alternative
(including the no action alternative or a
new alternative). EPA intends to work
with the lead agency to reduce these
impacts.
Category 1—Adequate
EPA believes the draft EIS adequately
sets forth the environmental impact(s) of
the preferred alternative and those of
the alternatives reasonably available to
the project or action. No further analysis
or data collection is necessary, but the
reviewer may suggest the addition of
clarifying language or information.
Category 2—Insufficient Information
The draft EIS does not contain
sufficient information for EPA to fully
assess environmental impacts that
should be avoided in order to fully
protect the environment, or the EPA
reviewer has identified new reasonably
available alternatives that are within the
spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the
draft EIS, which could reduce the
environmental impacts of the action.
The identified additional information,
data, analyses, or discussion should be
included in the final EIS.
Category 3—Inadequate
EPA does not believe that the draft
EIS adequately assesses potentially
significant environmental impacts of the
action, or the EPA reviewer has
identified new, reasonably available
alternatives that are outside of the
spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the
draft EIS, which should be analyzed in
order to reduce the potentially
significant environmental impacts. EPA
believes that the identified additional
information, data, analyses, or
discussions are of such a magnitude that
they should have full public review at
a draft stage. EPA does not believe that
the draft EIS is adequate for the
purposes of the NEPA and/or section
309 review, and thus should be formally
revised and made available for public
comment in a supplemental or revised
draft EIS. On the basis of the potential
significant impacts involved, this
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19833
proposal could be a candidate for
referral to the CEQ.
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20070488, ERP No. D–DOE–
A09800–00, Programmatic—
Designation of Energy Corridors in 11
Western States, Preferred Location of
Future Oil, Gas, and Hydrogen
Pipelines and Electricity
Transmission and Distribution
Facilities on Federal Land, AZ, CA,
CO, ID, MT, NV, NM, UT, WA and
WY.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about potential
underestimation of wetlands in the
designated corridors.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080042, ERP No. D–AFS–
J65508–MT, Debaugan Fuels
Reduction Project, Proposed Fuels
Reduction Activities, Lolo National
Forest, Superior Ranger District,
Mineral County, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about water
quality impacts. EPA requested
additional analysis and information to
assess and mitigate impacts of the
management actions.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080047, ERP No. D–USN–
A11080–00, Atlantic Fleet Active
Sonar Training Program, To Provide
Mid- and High-Frequency Active
Sonar Technology and the Improved
Extended Echo Ranging (IEER) System
during Atlantic Fleet Training
Exercises, Along the East Coast of
United States (US) and in the Gulf of
Mexico.
Summary: EPA does not object to the
proposed action.
Rating LO.
EIS No. 20080054, ERP No. D–DOE–
J05080–MT, MATL 230–kV
Transmission Line Project, To
Construct, Operate, Maintain, and
Connect a 230-kV Electric
Transmission Line, Issuance of
Presidential Permit for Right-to-Way
Grant, Cascade, Teton, Chouteau,
Pondera, Toole and Glacier Counties,
MT.
Summary: EPA expressed
environmental concerns about water
quality and wetland impacts. EPA
recommended a modified preferred
alternative that would better optimize
the environmental, social and economic
trade-offs for this project. EPA requested
additional information regarding
mitigation of impacts.
Rating EC2.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20070457, ERP No. F–UAF–
B15000–MA, Final
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
19834
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 71 / Friday, April 11, 2008 / Notices
Recommendations and Associated
Actions for the 104th Fighter Wing
Massachusetts Air National Guard, Base
Realignment and Closure,
Implementation, Westfield-Barnes
Airport, Westfield, MA.
Summary: EPA had no objection to
the project and encouraged the National
Guard Bureau to work closely with local
communities.
EIS No. 20080062, ERP No. F–USA–
A11079–00, Permanent Home
Stationing of the 2/25th Stryker
Brigade Combat Team (SBECT), To
Address a Full Range of Alternatives
for Permanently Stationing the 2/25th
SBCT, Hawaii and Honolulu
Counties, HI; Anchorage and
Southeast Fairbanks Boroughs, AK; El
Paso, Pueblo, and Fremont Counties,
CO.
Summary: EPA’s previous concerns
have been resolved; therefore, EPA does
not object to the proposed project.
EIS No. 20080073, ERP No. F–FHW–
F40812–IL, Prairie Parkway Study,
Transportation System Improvement
between I–80 and I–88, Widening IL–
47 to 4 Lanes from I–80 to Caton Farm
Road, Funding, U.S. Army COE
section 404, Grundy, Kendall and
Kane Counties, IL.
Summary: EPA continues to have
environmental concerns about water
quality and aquatic life impacts due to
road salt and other pollutants.
Dated: April 8, 2008.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E8–7784 Filed 4–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[ER–FRL–6697–7]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 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 03/31/2008 Through 04/04/2008
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.
EIS No. 20080125, Draft EIS, FHW, NC,
I–26 Connector Project, Proposed
Multi-Land Freeway from I–40 to US
19–23–70 North of Asheville,
Funding, U.S. Coast Guard Permit, US
Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permit,
Buncombe County, Asheville, NC,
Comment Period Ends: 05/19/2008,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:21 Apr 10, 2008
Jkt 214001
Contact: John F. Sullivan, III, P.E.
919–856–4346 Ext. 122
EIS No. 20080126, Draft EIS, AFS, ID,
Corralled Bear Project, Management of
Vegetation, Hazardous Fuels, and
Access, Plus Watershed
Improvements, Palouse Ranger
District, Clearwater National Forest,
Latah County, ID, Comment Period
Ends: 05/19/2008, Contact: Kara
Chadwick 208–875–1131.
EIS No. 20080127, Final Supplement,
FHW, MT, US 93 Highway Ninepipe/
Ronan Improvement Project, from
Dublin Gulch Road/Red Horn Road,
Funding, Special-Use-Permit, NPDES
Permit and U.S. Army COE Section
404 Permit, Lake County, MT, Wait
Period Ends: 05/05/2008, Contact:
Craig Genzlinger, P.E. 406–449–5302.
EIS No. 20080128, Draft Supplement,
MMS, 00, Gulf of Mexico Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Lease
Sales: 2009–2012 Western Planning
Area Sales: 210 in 2009, 215 in 2010,
and 218 in 2011, and Central
Planning Area Sales: 208 in 2009, 213
in 2010, 216 in 2011, and 222 in 2012,
TX, LA, MS, AL and FL, Comment
Period Ends: 06/03/2008, Contact: Dr.
Mary Boatman 703–737–1662.
EIS No. 20080129, Draft EIS, FHW, UT,
Layton Interchange Project,
Improvements on I–15 (Exit–330) to
Provide Unrestricted Access Across
the Unicon Pacific Railroad and to
Address Traffic Congestion on Gentile
St. in West Layton, Layton City, UT,
Comment Period Ends: 05/27/2008,
Contact: Doug Atkin 801–963–0182.
EIS No. 20080130, Final EIS, AFS, 00,
Mt. Ashland Late-Successional
Reserve Habitat Restoration and Fuels
Reduction Project, To Promote and
Maintain Late-Successional Habitat,
Oak Knoll Ranger District, Klamath
National Forest, Siskiyou County, CA
and Jackson County, OR, Wait Period
Ends: 05/05/2008, Contact: Susan
Stresser 530–841–4538.
EIS No. 20080131, Final EIS, AFS, CA,
Eldorado National Forest Public
Wheeled Motorized Travel
Management Project, Proposes to
Regulate Unmanaged Public Wheeled
Motor Vehicle, Implementation,
Alphine, Amador, El Dorado and
Placer Counties, CA, Wait Period
Ends: 05/05/2008, Contact: Laura
Hierholzer 530–647–5382.
EIS No. 20080132, Final EIS, USN, VA,
Marine Corps Base Quantico (MCBQ)
Virginia Project, Proposes
Development of the Westside of
MCBQ and the 2005 Base
Realignment and Closure Action at
MCBQ, Implementation, Quantico,
VA, Wait Period Ends: 05/05/2008,
Contact: Jeff Gardner 703–432–6784.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Amended Notices
EIS No. 20080111, Draft EIS, COE, 00,
Programmatic—Hydropower
Rehabilitations, Dissolved Oxygen
and Minimum Flow Regimes at Wolf
Creek Dam, Kentucky and Center Hill
and Dale Hollow Dams, Tennessee,
Implementation, Comment Period
Ends: 05/12/2008, Contact: Chip Hall
615–736–7666.
Revision to FR Notice Published 03/
28/2008: EIS is withdrawn due to NonDistribution of the document.
Dated: April 8, 2008.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office
of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E8–7787 Filed 4–10–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–ORD–2008–0268; FRL–8553–3]
Board of Scientific Counselors,
Executive Committee Meeting—May
2008
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act, Public Law
92–463, the Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and
Development (ORD), gives notice of one
meeting of the Board of Scientific
Counselors (BOSC) Executive
Committee.
The meeting will be held on
Tuesday, May 6, 2008, from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., and will continue on
Wednesday, May 7, 2008, from 8:30 a.m.
until 3:30 p.m. All times noted are
central time. The meeting may adjourn
early if all business is finished. Requests
for the draft agenda or for making oral
presentations at the meeting will be
accepted up to 1 business day before the
meeting.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Office of Research and
Development, National Health and
Environmental Effects Research
Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division, 1
Sabine Island Drive, Gulf Breeze,
Florida 32561. Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
ORD–2008–0268, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: Send comments by
electronic mail (e-mail) to:
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 71 (Friday, April 11, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19833-19834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-7784]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[ER-FRL-6697-8]
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.
Summary of Rating Definitions; Environmental Impact of the Action
LO--Lack of Objections
The EPA review has not identified any potential environmental
impacts requiring substantive changes to the proposal. The review may
have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures
that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the
proposal.
EC--Environmental Concerns
The EPA review has identified environmental impacts that should be
avoided in order to fully protect the environment. Corrective measures
may require changes to the preferred alternative or application of
mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact. EPA would
like to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts.
EO--Environmental Objections
The EPA review has identified significant environmental impacts
that must be avoided in order to provide adequate protection for the
environment. Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the
preferred alternative or consideration of some other project
alternative (including the no action alternative or a new alternative).
EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts.
EU--Environmentally Unsatisfactory
The EPA review has identified adverse environmental impacts that
are of sufficient magnitude that they are unsatisfactory from the
standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality. EPA
intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. If the
potentially unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected at the final EIS
stage, this proposal will be recommended for referral to the CEQ.
Adequacy of the Impact Statement
Category 1--Adequate
EPA believes the draft EIS adequately sets forth the environmental
impact(s) of the preferred alternative and those of the alternatives
reasonably available to the project or action. No further analysis or
data collection is necessary, but the reviewer may suggest the addition
of clarifying language or information.
Category 2--Insufficient Information
The draft EIS does not contain sufficient information for EPA to
fully assess environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to
fully protect the environment, or the EPA reviewer has identified new
reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of
alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the
environmental impacts of the action. The identified additional
information, data, analyses, or discussion should be included in the
final EIS.
Category 3--Inadequate
EPA does not believe that the draft EIS adequately assesses
potentially significant environmental impacts of the action, or the EPA
reviewer has identified new, reasonably available alternatives that are
outside of the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS,
which should be analyzed in order to reduce the potentially significant
environmental impacts. EPA believes that the identified additional
information, data, analyses, or discussions are of such a magnitude
that they should have full public review at a draft stage. EPA does not
believe that the draft EIS is adequate for the purposes of the NEPA
and/or section 309 review, and thus should be formally revised and made
available for public comment in a supplemental or revised draft EIS. On
the basis of the potential significant impacts involved, this proposal
could be a candidate for referral to the CEQ.
Draft EISs
EIS No. 20070488, ERP No. D-DOE-A09800-00, Programmatic--Designation of
Energy Corridors in 11 Western States, Preferred Location of Future
Oil, Gas, and Hydrogen Pipelines and Electricity Transmission and
Distribution Facilities on Federal Land, AZ, CA, CO, ID, MT, NV, NM,
UT, WA and WY.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about potential
underestimation of wetlands in the designated corridors.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080042, ERP No. D-AFS-J65508-MT, Debaugan Fuels Reduction
Project, Proposed Fuels Reduction Activities, Lolo National Forest,
Superior Ranger District, Mineral County, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about water quality
impacts. EPA requested additional analysis and information to assess
and mitigate impacts of the management actions.
Rating EC2.
EIS No. 20080047, ERP No. D-USN-A11080-00, Atlantic Fleet Active Sonar
Training Program, To Provide Mid- and High-Frequency Active Sonar
Technology and the Improved Extended Echo Ranging (IEER) System during
Atlantic Fleet Training Exercises, Along the East Coast of United
States (US) and in the Gulf of Mexico.
Summary: EPA does not object to the proposed action.
Rating LO.
EIS No. 20080054, ERP No. D-DOE-J05080-MT, MATL 230-kV Transmission
Line Project, To Construct, Operate, Maintain, and Connect a 230-kV
Electric Transmission Line, Issuance of Presidential Permit for Right-
to-Way Grant, Cascade, Teton, Chouteau, Pondera, Toole and Glacier
Counties, MT.
Summary: EPA expressed environmental concerns about water quality
and wetland impacts. EPA recommended a modified preferred alternative
that would better optimize the environmental, social and economic
trade-offs for this project. EPA requested additional information
regarding mitigation of impacts.
Rating EC2.
Final EISs
EIS No. 20070457, ERP No. F-UAF-B15000-MA, Final
[[Page 19834]]
Recommendations and Associated Actions for the 104th Fighter Wing
Massachusetts Air National Guard, Base Realignment and Closure,
Implementation, Westfield-Barnes Airport, Westfield, MA.
Summary: EPA had no objection to the project and encouraged the
National Guard Bureau to work closely with local communities.
EIS No. 20080062, ERP No. F-USA-A11079-00, Permanent Home Stationing of
the 2/25th Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBECT), To Address a Full Range
of Alternatives for Permanently Stationing the 2/25th SBCT, Hawaii and
Honolulu Counties, HI; Anchorage and Southeast Fairbanks Boroughs, AK;
El Paso, Pueblo, and Fremont Counties, CO.
Summary: EPA's previous concerns have been resolved; therefore, EPA
does not object to the proposed project.
EIS No. 20080073, ERP No. F-FHW-F40812-IL, Prairie Parkway Study,
Transportation System Improvement between I-80 and I-88, Widening IL-47
to 4 Lanes from I-80 to Caton Farm Road, Funding, U.S. Army COE section
404, Grundy, Kendall and Kane Counties, IL.
Summary: EPA continues to have environmental concerns about water
quality and aquatic life impacts due to road salt and other pollutants.
Dated: April 8, 2008.
Ken Mittelholtz,
Environmental Protection Specialist, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. E8-7784 Filed 4-10-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P