58968 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 211 / Friday, October 31, 1997 / Notices

received. This information was

summarized and addressed in the Final

EIS, released to the public on August 8,

1997.

The verbal comments could be

summarized into six issues of concern,

expressed mainly but not exclusively by

residents of the Navajo Nation. These

were: (1) concerns over the distribution

of project revenues to Navajo chapters,

(2) concerns about extending the local

electrical distribution system, (3)

concerns for health and safety, (4)

concerns over involving the public in

the project status, (5) concerns over the

acquisition of rights-of-way, and (6)

concerns for employment opportunities.

In addition, a few comments identified

other issues.

Each of the concerns expressed orally

or in writing was addressed in the Final

EIS, by providing a reference to a

previous discussion in the Draft EIS, by

expanding on those previous

discussions in the Final, and/or by

providing new information. A standard

answer was provided to each of the six

issues discussed above, rather than

respond individually to multiple

questions on the same issues. Only one

minor modification to the

environmentally preferred alternative in

the eastern half of the project area was

presented in the Final EIS. This was in

response to concerns expressed by the

public during and immediately

following the public meetings. Local

land users in the Dennehotso, Arizona

area expressed concerns over the

preferred alternative passing through

areas of dispersed but common use,

though the alternative would not impact

any residences directly. The route of the

alternative was modified slightly to

satisfy these concerns.

The Decision

Western has decided that should the

NTP be built, it should follow the

preferred alternative described in the

NTP Final EIS. The project would

satisfy the needs identified in the EIS:

it would relieve the constraints on the

transmission of electricity out of the

region; it would improve the flexibility

and reliability of the existing system; it

would allow the economical transfer,

sales, and purchases of power in the

region; and it would provide an

opportunity for the Navajo Nation to

improve economic conditions. Based

upon the information gathered

throughout the EIS process, Western

provided the public and the

decisionmaker with complete

information on the environmental

impacts associated with the project.

Western analyzed several alternatives to

the proposed action in terms of their

ability to satisfy the identified needs.

Western then analyzed many routing

alternatives in order to arrive at the least

environmentally damaging alternative

routes.

The following factors were taken into

account in arriving at the preferred

alternative: (1) environmental

acceptability, (2) siting and permitting

requirements that vary by land status

(i.e., Federal, state, tribal, and local), (3)

public and agency preferences,

especially those of the Cooperating

Agencies, (4) electrical system

considerations such as power flow and

the impacts on system interconnections,

(5) engineering factors leading to an

increase in costs, such as the length of

route, construction difficulty,

accessibility, extent of mitigation

required, and the extent of design

modifications needed for mitigation, (6)

rights-of-way acquisition

considerations, and (7) consideration of

the statutory obligations of the

permitting agencies.

In making this decision, Western

believes that all practicable means to

avoid or minimize significant impacts

have been presented in the NTP EIS in

the form of standard and specific

mitigation measures.

The Kaibab National Forest; Bureau of

Indian Affairs, Navajo and Phoenix Area

Offices; Bureau of Land Management,

Arizona State Office (representing the

state BLM offices in Arizona, Nevada,

and New Mexico); and the National Park

Service, Colorado Plateau Systems

Support Office, participated in the NTP

EIS as Cooperating Agencies. In

addition to the Federal agencies, the

Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, and the

Navajo Nation participated as

Cooperating Agencies. These agencies

and tribes have decisions to make

concerning the granting of rights-of-way

for the alignment described in the EIS,

provided a Construction, Operation, and

Maintenance Plan for the construction

of the NTP, including a plan for all

necessary environmental mitigation, is

prepared and agreed upon by all parties.

Mitigation Action Plan

The Final EIS presents reasonable and

practicable mitigation measures to

reduce the severity of the impacts

associated with construction of the line.

The preferred action, given the analysis

process and the proposed mitigation,

will not have a significant impact on

environmental factors, with the

exception of the potential for impacts on

visual resources and Hopi, Hualapai,

and Navajo traditional cultural places as

discussed above. Western will issue a

Mitigation Action Plan (MAP), as

required by DOE NEPA implementing

procedures found at 10 CFR § 1021.331,

at a later date. The MAP will detail the

mitigation and monitoring required to

reduce impacts to less than significant.

Western’s final decision is contingent

upon the construction of the line

consistent with the requirements of the

MAP, and acceptance of the MAP by the

Cooperating Agencies.

Dated: October 23, 1997.

Michael S. Hacskaylo,

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–28910 Filed 10–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER-FRL–5485–6]

Environmental Impact Statements;

Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal

Activities, General Information (202)

564–7167 OR (202) 564–7153.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact

Statements

Filed October 20, 1997 Through October

24, 1997

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 970405, Draft EIS, COE, FL, C–

51 West End Flood Control Project,

Implementation To Improve the Level

of Flood Control, Central and

Southern Florida Project, Palm Beach

County, FL, Due: December 15, 1997,

Contact: Bill Porter (904) 232–2259.

EIS No. 970406, Final EIS, AFS, MT,

Lost Trail Ski Area Expansion Project,

Implementation, New Master

Development Plan, Bitterroot National

Forest, Sula Ranger District, Ravalli

County, MT, Due: December 01, 1997,

Contact: Gina Owens (406) 821–3201.

EIS No. 970407, Final EIS, FAA, HI,

Kahului Airport Master Plan

Improvements, Implementation,

Funding and Approval of Permits,

Kahului, Maui County, HI, Due:

December 01, 1997, Contact: David J.

Welhouse (808) 541–1243.

EIS No. 970408, Draft EIS, FHW, IL, IL–

315 Federal Aid Primary (FAP)/

(Illinois-336) Transportation Project,

Construction from FAP 315, IL 336

(Southeast of Carthage) to US 136

(Just West of Macomb), Funding, COE

404 Permit and NPDES Permit,

Hancock and McDonough Counties,

IL, Due: December 15, 1997, Contact:

Ronald Marshall (217) 492–4600.

EIS No. 970409, Draft EIS, BLM, OR,

Northeastern Oregon Assembled Land

Exchange Resource Management Plan

(RMP), Implementation, Site Specific,

John Day, Umatilla, Granda Ronde,

Power River Basins, Grant, Umatilla,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 211 / Friday, October 31, 1997 / Notices 58969

Morrow, Wheeler, Baker, Wallowa and

Union Counties, OR, Due: December 15,

1997, Contact: Dick Cosgriffe (541) 416–

6731.

EIS No. 970410, Final Supplement,

COE, NJ, Green Brook Sub-Basin

Flood Control Plan, Updated

Information Concerning a Revised

Recommended Plan and Mitigation

Plan, Implementation, Middlesex,

Union and Somerset Counties, NJ,

Due: December 01, 1997, Contact:

William A. Richardson (212) 264–

2199.

EIS No. 970411, Final EIS, TVA, AL,

Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Conversion

Project, Construction and Operation,

NPDES Permit and COE Section 404

Permit, Tennessee River near

Hollywood, AL, Due: December 01,

1997, Contact: Gregory L. Askew (423)

632–6418.

EIS No. 970412, Final EIS, GSA, OH,

Voice of America Bethany Relay

Station, Disposal and Reuse (VOA)

Property for Public and/or Private

Development, Union Township,

Butler County, OH, Due: December

01, 1997, Contact: William Costa (617)

565–5696.

EIS No. 970413, Final EIS, NRCS, TX,

Bexar-Medina-Atascosa Counties

Water Conservation Plan, Renovation

and Installation, Funding, Medina

Lake, Bexar, Medina and Atascosa

Counties, TX, Due: December 01,

1997, Contact: John P. Burt (254) 298–

1214.

EIS No. 970414, Draft EIS, AFS, MT,

Flathead National Forest,

Management Direction Plan Related to

Old Growth Forests, Forest Plan

Amendment No. 21, Implementation,

Flathead, Lake, Lincoln, Missoula and

Lewis and Clark Counties, MT, Due:

December 19, 1997, Contact: Jim

Morrison (406) 758–5200.

EIS No. 970415, Final EIS, BLM, CA,

Interlakes Special Recreation

Management Area Plan,

Implementation, Federal and Private

Lands Issues, Shasta County, CA, Due:

December 01, 1997, Contact: Eric

Morgan (916) 224–2100. The US

Department of Interior’s, Bureau of

Reclamation and National Park

Service and the US Department of

Agriculture’s, Forest Service are CoLead Agencies for the above EIS.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 970290, Final EIS, FHW, CO,

CO–82 Highway Transportation

Project, Improvements to ‘‘Entrance to

Aspen’’, Funding and COE Section

404 Permit, City of Aspen, Pitkin

County, CO, Due: November 05, 1997,

Contact: Ron Speral (303) 969–6737.

Published FR 08–01–97—Review

Period extended.

Dated: October 28, 1997.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–28960 Filed 10–30–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–5485–7]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared September 22, 1997 Through

September 26, 1997 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 11, 1997 (62 FR 16154).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–DOE–L08053–00 Rating

LO, Lower Valley Transmission Project,

Construction of a New 115 kV

Transmission Line from Swan Valley

Substation near Swan Valley, SpecialUse-Permits, Bonneville and Teton

Counties, ID and Teton County, WY.

Summary: Review of the Draft EIS has

been completed and the project found to

be satisfactory.

ERP No. D–FHW–K40221–CA Rating

EO2, C–84—Realignment Project,

Transportation Improvement between

CA–84 from I–880 to CA–2389/Mission

Blvd. Funding and COE Section 404

Permit, in the Cities of Fremont,

Hayward and Union, Alameda County,

CA.

Summary: EPA had environmental

objections to the build alternatives

based on concerns with the purpose and

need, alternative analysis, impacts to

water and air resources, and indirect

and cumulative effects of the project.

EPA suggested other alternatives be

examined which also meet the stated

purpose and need.

ERP No. D–FHW–K40226–CA Rating

EC2, CA–37 Highway Improvement,

Napa River Bridge to the existing

Freeway Section of CA–37 that begins

near Diablo Street, Funding and US

Army COE Section 404 Permit Issuance,

Vallejo, Solano County, CA.

Summary: EPA had environmental

concerns regarding the cumulative

impacts, mitigation for wetland impacts

and CO hotspot analysis presented in

the DEIS for the FHWA’s CA–37

Improvement Project.

ERP No. D–GSA–L80016–WA Rating

* LO, Seattle New Federal Courthouse,

Construction, King County, WA.

SUMMARY: EPA does not foresee

having any environmental objections to

the proposed project.

ERP No. D–JUS–K80035–CA Rating

EC2, Service Processing Center (SPC) for

Detainees, Construction and Operation,

Possible Sites, Stockton and Tracy Sites,

San Joaquin Counties, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concern regarding the air

conformity analysis, potential water and

waste water impacts and cumulative

impact. EPA requested additional

information on these issues.

ERP No. D–UAF–G11033–NM Rating

EC2, Holloman Air Force Base,

Proposed Expansion of German Air

Force Operations, for the Beddown of 30

Aircrafts and Construction of Facilities

for 640 Personnel, NM.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns and requested

additional information in the areas of

environmental justice, and mitigation.

ERP No. D–UMC–K36048–CA Rating

EC2, Santa Margarita River Flood

Control Project (MILCON P–010) and

Basilone Road Bridge Replacement

Project (MILCON P–030), Construction

and Operation, COE Section 404 Permit,

Camp Pendleton, CA.

Summary: EPA had environmental

concerns and requested additional

information on the projects description,

practicable least-damaging alternatives

pursuant to the Clean Water Act

404(b)(1) Guidelines and biological

resources, including wetlands

mitigation.

Final EISs

ERP No. F–COE–L36110–WA, Cedar

River Section 205 Flood Damage

Reduction Plan, Implementation,

Renton, King County, WA.

Summary: EPA had no objection to

the preferred minimum dredging

alternative. The final EIS is consistent

with the draft.

ERP No. F–FHW–K40210–AZ, Pima

Freeway—Loop 101, Construction, I–17

and Scottsdale Road, Funding, NPDES

and COE Section 404 Permits, Maricopa

County, AZ.

Summary: Review of the Final EIS

was not deemed necessary. No formal

comment letter was sent to the

preparing agency.

ERP No. F–NRC–K01008–00,

Crownpoint Uranium Solution Mining