16154 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 65 / Friday, April 4, 1997 / Notices

[ER–FRL–5478–8]

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 March 24, 1997

Through March 28, 1997 Pursuant to 40

CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 970108, DRAFT EIS, NRCS, HI,

Waimea-Paauilo Watershed Project,

Alleviation of Agricultural Water

Storage Problems for Crop Irrigation

and Livestock Drinking Water,

Funding, COE Section 404 Permit

Issuance and Implementation, Hawaii

County, HI, Due: May 19, 1997,

Contact: Kenneth M. Kaneshiro (808)

541–2601.

EIS No. 970109, FINAL EIS, DOE, ID,

NV, WA, MT, OR, WY, Wildlife

Mitigation Program Standards and

Guidelines, Implementation,

Columbia River Basin, WA, OR, ID,

MT, WY and NV, Due: May 05, 1997,

Contact: Thomas C. McKinney (503)

230–4749.

EIS No. 970110, DRAFT EIS, COE, WA,

Cedar River Section 205 Flood

Damage Reduction Plan,

Implementation, Renton, King

County, WA, Due: May 19, 1997,

Contact: Merri Martz (206) 764–3624.

EIS No. 970111, DRAFT EIS, AFS, OR,

Summit Fire Recovery Forest

Restoration Project, Implementation,

Malheur National Forest, Long Creek

Ranger District, Grant County, OR,

Due: May 19, 1997, Contact: Robert

Hammond (541) 575–3000.

EIS No. 970112, FINAL SUPPLEMENT,

FHW, NB, US 275 Highway

Reconstruction on New Alignment

west of the existing US 275/N–36

Intersection to west of the existing US

275/N–64 (West Maple Road)

Interchange near Waterloo, Funding,

Douglas County, NB, Due: May 05,

1997, Contact: Edward W Kosola (402)

437–5521.

EIS No. 970113, DRAFT EIS, USA, IN,

Camp Atterbury Training Areas and

Facilities Upgrading, Implementation,

Bartholomew, Brown, Johnson,

Marion and Shelby Counties, IN, Due:

May 19, 1997, Contact: Jack Fowler

(812) 526–1169.

EIS No. 970114, FINAL EIS, COE, MN,

IA, WI, 9-Foot Navigation Channel

Project, Channel Maintenance

Management Plan, Upper Mississippi

River Head of Navigation to

Guttenberg, IA, Implementation, MN,

WI and IA, Due: May 19, 1997,

Contact: Robert Whiting (612) 290–

5264.

EIS No. 970115, DRAFT EIS, FTA, LA,

Canal Streetcar Line Reintroduction,

Canal Street from the Mississippi

River to the Cemeteries, with a Spur

Line to City Park, Funding, City of

New Orleans, Orleans Parish, LA,

Due: May 19, 1997, Contact: Peggy

Crist (817) 860–9663.

EIS No. 970116, FINAL EIS, USA, MO,

US Army Chemical School and US

Army Military Police School

Relocation to Fort Leonard Wood

(FWL) from Fort McClellan, Alabama,

Implementation, Cities of St. Robert,

Waynesville, Richland, Dixon,

Crocker, Rolla, Houston and Lebanon;

Pulaski, Texas, Phelps and Laclede

Counties, MO, Due: May 05, 1997,

Contact: Alan Gehrt (816) 426–2142.

EIS No. 970117, FINAL EIS, TVA, VA,

ADOPTION—United States

Penitentiary, Lee, Pennington Gap,

Funding, Lee County, VA, Due: May

05, 1997, Contact: Linda B. Oxendine

(423) 632–3440. The US Tennessee

Valley Authority (TVA) has adopted

the US Department of Justice’s,

Bureau of Prisons FEIS #960500, filed

with the US Environmental Protection

Agency on 10–17–96. TVA was not a

Cooperating Agency on this project.

Recirculation of the document is

necessary under Section 1506.3(b) of

the Council on Environmental Quality

Regulations.

EIS No. 970118, DRAFT SUPPLEMENT,

AFS, CO, Vail Ski Area Category III

Development Plan, Additional

Information Concerning an Analysis

of the Significance of Adopting Forest

Plan Amendments, Implementation,

Special-Use-Permit and COE Section

404 Permit Issuance, White River

National Forest, Holly Cross Ranger

District, Rocky Mountain Region,

Eagle County, CO, Due: May 19, 1997,

Contact: Loren Kroenke (970) 827–

5715.

Dated: April 1, 1997.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 97–8703 Filed 4–3–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

[ER–FRL–5478–9]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared March 17, 1997 through March

21, 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.

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