Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Agency statements— Comment availability,

[Federal Register: March 19, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 53)]

[Notices]

[Page 13575-13576]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr19mr99-71]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-6240-9]

Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments

Availability of EPA comments prepared February 22, 1999 Through February 26, 1999 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 10, 1998 (63 FR 17856).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D-COE-E34030-FL, Rating EC2, Programmatic EIS--Central and Southern Florida Multi-Purpose Project, Comprehensive Review Study, Everglades National Park, Orlando to Florida Bay, FL.

SUMMARY: EPA supports the restoration concept and encourages their proper implementation. EPA believes that improving water quantity delivery alone will not restore the Everglades and the South Florida ecosystem; instead, both water quantity and water quality components are needed to provide the clean water volumes

[[Page 13576]]

required for true natural system restoration. EPA encouraged the COE to include additional water quality features in the pending FPEIS and future optimization of water quality features. EPA expressed concerns regarding project uncertainties associated with the proposed aquifer recovery system funding and modeling.

ERP No. D-COE-K39055-AZ, Rating LO, Alamo Lake Reoperation and Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study, Implementation, Reoperation of Alma Dam on the Bill Williams River, La Paz and Mohave Counties, AZ.

SUMMARY: EPA had no objections to the project which would result in increased seasonal flows from Alamo Lake that should have positive effects on riparian habitat downstream.

ERP No. D-IBR-K39054-CA Rating EC2, Groundwater Replenishment System, Implementation to Repurifying Water from Orange County Water District (OCWD) Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD), Funding and COE Section 404 Permit, Orange County, CA.

SUMMARY: EPA supported the project which focuses on wastewater reuse and recycling, and supported the project benefit of postponing the need for an additional ocean outfall discharge pipe. EPA urged the project sponsors to continue to aggressively pursue other demand management measures. EPA expressed concerns and requested additional information regarding: (1) potential adverse effects on flood protection, (2) operation and effectiveness of the saltwater intrusion barrier, and (3) implementation and effectiveness monitoring.

Final EISs

ERP No. F-COE-C39010-NJ, Lower Cape May Meadows--Cape May Point Feasibility Study, Ecosystem Restoration, New Jersey Shore Protection Study, Cape May County, NJ.

SUMMARY: EPA expressed environmental concerns that implementation of multiple projects of the type (and other projects effecting the same resources) could result in adverse cumulative impacts. EPA suggested that a comprehensive cumulative impacts analysis be prepared for all of these projects prior to construction.

ERP No. F-COE-F35042-IN, Indiana Harbor and Canal Dredging and Confined Disposal Facility, Construction and Operation, Comprehensive Management Plan, East Chicago, Lake County, ID.

SUMMARY: The Final EIS has adequately resolved EPA's previous concerns. Therefore, EPA has no objections to the implementation of the proposed project.

ERP No. F-TVA-E39037-00, Shoreline Management Initiative: An Assessment of Residential Shoreline Development Impacts in the Tennessee Valley, Mainstream Tennessee River and Tributary Reservoirs in AL, KY, NC, TN, GA, MS and VA.

SUMMARY: EPA continues to have some environmental concerns due to the inherent nature of shoreline development relative to erosion, water quality, habitat loss, and induced (secondary) impacts associated with development.

ERP No. FS-COE-C32030-00, Arthur Kill Channel--Howland Hook Marine Terminal, Deepening and Realignment, Limited Reevaluation Report (LRR) Port of New York and New Jersey, NY and NJ.

SUMMARY: EPA does not anticipate that the proposed project would result in significant adverse environmental impacts and does not object to its implementation.

Dated: March 16, 1999. William D. Dickerson, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 99-6804Filed3-18-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U