57336 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 185 / Friday, September 22, 2000 / Notices

Dated: September 6, 2000.

Penny Carey,

Chemical Engineer.

[FR Doc. 00–24434 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–6611–1]

Environmental Impact Statements;

Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal

Activities, General Information, (202)

564–7167 or www.epa.gov/oeca/ofa.

Weekly receipt of Environmental

Impact Statements Filed September 11,

2000 Through September 15, 2000

Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 000321, Final EIS, BLM, OR,

North Bank Habitat Management Area

(NBHMA)/Area of Critical

Environmental Concern (ACEC),

Federally Endangered Columbian

White-Tailed Deer (CWTD) and

Special Status Species Habitat

Enhancements to Ensure Viability

Over Time, Implementation, OR, Due:

October 23, 2000, Contact: Jay Carlson

(541) 440–4930.

EIS No. 000322, Revised Draft EIS, FAA,

CA, Metropolitan Oakland

International Airport (MOIA), Airport

Development Plan (ADP),

Reevaluation of the Forecasts and

Planning Assumptions in the ADP,

Airport Layout Plan Approval,

Funding and COE Section 404 and 10

Permits Issuance, Port of Oakland,

Alameda County, CA, Due: October

30, 2000, Contact: Joseph R.

Rodriguez (650) 876–2805.

EIS No. 000323, Final EIS, CGD, IL, MI,

OH, NY, IN, MN, WI, PA, Great Lakes

Icebreaking Operation,

Implementation, Ninth District, IL, IN,

MI, MN, OH, WI, NY and PA, Due:

October 23, 2000, Contact: Gary

Nelson (216) 902–6258.

EIS No. 000324, Final EIS, SFW, CA,

San Dieguito Wetland Restoration

Project, Implementation,

Comprehensive Restoration Plan, COE

Section 404 Permit, Cities of Del Mar

and San Diego, San Diego County, CA,

Due: October 23, 2000, Contact: Jack

Fancher (760) 431–9440.

EIS No. 000325, Draft EIS, AFS, OK,

Quachita National Forest, An

Amendment to the Land and Resource

Management Plan, Implementation,

Glover River, McCurtain County, OK,

Due: December 29, 2000, Contact:

Elizabeth Estill (404) 347–4178.

EIS No. 000326, Final EIS, AFS, WV,

Fernow Experimental Forest,

Implementation of New Research

Studies, Monongahela National Forest

Land and Resource Management Plan,

Tucker County, WV, Due: October 23,

2000, Contact: Mary Beth Adams

(304) 478–2000.

EIS No. 000327, Final EIS, SFW, MT,

WA, ID, Plum Creek Native Fish

Habitat Conservation Plan, Issuance of

an Incidental Take Permit for

Federally Protected Native Fish

Species, MT, ID and WA, Due:

October 23, 2000, Contact: Ben

Harrison (503) 231–2068.

EIS No. 000328, Final EIS, BLM, NM,

Rio Puerco Resource Management

Plan Amendment, Managing Land

and Resource for EL Malpais National

Conservation Area and Chain of

Craters Wilderness Study Area, Lies

South of the City of Grants, Cibola

County, NM, Due: October 23, 2000,

Contact: Kent Hamilton (505) 761–

8746.

EIS No. 000329, Final EIS, USN, GU,

Surplus Navy Property Identified in

the Guam Land Use Plan (GLUP ’94)

for Disposal and Reuse,

Implementation, GU, Due: October 23,

2000, Contact: Gerald Gibbons (808)

471–9338.

Dated: September 19, 2000.

Anne Norton Miller,

Acting Director, Office of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 00–24451 Filed 9–21–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–6611–2]

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 14, 2000 (65 FR

20157).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–OE–K36133–CA Rating

EC2, Whitewater River Basin (Thousand

Palms) Flood Control Project,

Construction of Facilities to Provide

Flood Protection, Coachella Valley,

Riverside County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed concerns

that the DEIS did not address the need

for air quality mitigation measures that

may be necessary for emissions of

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), ozone

precursors, and carbon monoxide under

EPA’s general conformity rule. EPA also

had concerns that the DEIS asserts that

there is no need to secure Clean Water

Act Section 401 water quality

certification or waiver from the state

water pollution control agency, which is

an important safeguard to ensure that

Federally-authorized projects do not

violate State-adopted, EPA-approved

Water Quality Standards or impair

beneficial uses. The Final EIS should

address how the Corps would ensure

that Water Quality Standards and

beneficial uses are fully protected.

ERP No. D–COE–K39060–CA Rating

EC2, Upper Newport Bay Restoration

Project, To Develop a Long-Term

Management Plan to Control Sediment

Deposition, Orange County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed concerns

regarding impacts to air quality and that

some reasonable alternatives were not

evaluated, including reduced dredging,

controlling sediment before reaching the

Bay, and beneficial re-use of dredged

material. We recommended additional

information in the FEIS regarding other

reasonable project alternatives,

including disposal alternatives; baseline

assumptions and evaluation criteria;

and conformity with the State

Implementation Plan.

ERP No. D–COE–L39056–WA Rating

LO, Programmatic EIS—Green/

Duwamish River Basin Restoration

Program, Capitol Improvement Type

Program and Ecological Health, King

County, WA.

Summary: EPA had no objection to

the proposed project. EPA did however

provide comments on the cumulative

effects analysis, the need for more

information on funding mechanisms

and some concerns over the level of

public access allowed to restoration

sites, especially sensitive wetlands.

ERP No. D–FHW–G40158–TX Rating

EO2, Grand Parkway (TX–99) Segment

C, Construction from US 59 to TX 288,

Funding and Right-of-Way

Requirements, City of Houston, Fort

Bend and Brazoria Counties, TX.

Summary: EPA expressed objection

due to the project’s potential

contribution to air quality issues in

Houston. The project is likely to create

significant secondary development that

may delay the attainment of the ozone

air quality standard. EPA requested that

the final document address the overall

impact of the project and how the

project affects attainment and meets the

intent of the Clean Air Act.

ERP No. D–SFW–F64004–OH Rating

LO, Little Darby National Wildlife