Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 1995 / Notices 19915

another long window of opportunity to

file refund applications. Many firms and

individuals may have already heard of

the Subpart V refund process and

simply decided not to apply for a

refund. Further, even those that have

not yet heard about the refund process

might not wish to file a claim, even if

they were made aware of their

eligibility. We do not believe that it

would be useful to hold open the refund

process based upon the speculation

raised by commenters. It is simply not

feasible to hold the proceeding open to

ensure that all eligible claimants have

received notice of the opportunity to

apply. We believe it is sufficient to

provide adequate notice of the

proceeding, and a reasonable period for

applications to be submitted. We find

that this notice and opportunity have

been provided over the course of the

eight-year refund period. Further, in

view of the fact that notice of the

reopening of this refund proceeding was

published on November 8, 1994, we

find that there has been adequate time

for filing services to renew their search

efforts and provide additional

notification.

The comments submitted by filing

services representing larger refund

applicants in this proceeding indicate

that they are generally not now seeking

to locate additional refund claimants.

This group urged that the application

period be quickly terminated. These

firms and individuals point out that the

longer the claim period remains open,

the more delay there will be in

terminating the entire crude oil

overcharge refund process, and in

disbursing the final refund payment. We

believe that there is considerable merit

to this position.

We are also aware that a new, lengthy

additional window of opportunity for

filing refund claims may result in a large

number of duplicate claims,

administrative waste, and confusion

among members of the public.

Accordingly, we find that prompt

closure of the refund application period

will best promote our goals of

administrative efficiency and finality.

Therefore, the final date for filing

Applications for Refund in the OHA

Subpart V crude oil overcharge refund

proceeding will be June 30, 1995. All

crude oil refund applications must be

postmarked no later than that date.

Dated: April 17, 1995.

George B. Breznay,

Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals.

[FR Doc. 95–9934 Filed 4–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–4722–4]

Environmental Impact Statements and

Regulations; Availability of EPA

Comments

Availability of EPA comments

prepared March 20, 1995 Through

March 24, 1995 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) 260–5076.

An explanation of the ratings assigned

to draft environmental impact

statements (EISs) was published in FR

dated April 14, 1995 (72 FR 19047).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–AFS–J65227–MT Rating

EC2, Wagner-Atlanta Vegetation

Treatment Project, Implementation,

Helena National Forest, Townsend

Ranger District, Meagher County, MT.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

concerns with the treatment methods/

units, existing degraded water quality/

fisheries in the project area, and an

inadequate plan for a water quality

monitoring program. EPA recommended

additional information be collected to

fully assess and mitigate impacts of the

proposed action. EPA supported a

combination of grass burns (Alternative

C) and harvest methods from the other

alternatives which protect big game,

minimize new road construction,

protect water quality, in stream uses and

the aquatic ecosystem.

ERP No. D–AFS–J65228–UT Rating

EC1, Jacob/Swale Vegetation

Management Project, Implementation,

Dixie National Forest, Escalante Ranger

District, Garfield County, UT.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

concerns and recommended that a

preferred alternative be selected that

minimizes the impacts to road

management, roadless areas and wildlife

habitat concerns.

ERP No. D–AFS–L65233–OR Rating

EC2, Sandy River Delta Plan,

Implementation, Special Management

Area (SMA), Columbia River Gorge

National Scenic Area (NSA), Several

Permits for Approval, US Coast Guard

Bridge Permit and COE Section 404

Permit, Multnomah County, OR.

Summary

EPA supported the wetland vegetation

restoration objectives of the draft EIS,

but expressed environmental concerns

regarding the repeated use of herbicides

to meet vegetative objectives. EPA

preferred the re-establishment of the

original native species mix to the extent

possible, to create a self-sustaining

wetland system without using

herbicides.

ERP No. D–AFS–L65234–ID Rating

EC2, Hobo Cornwall Project Area

Timber Sale and Ecosystem

Management Plan, Implementation,

Idaho Panhandle National Forests, St.

Joe Ranger District, Shoshone County,

ID.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

concerns based on potential water

quality standards violations and the lack

of an air quality impacts analysis.

Additional information is requested to

clarify compliance with state water

quality standards and to disclose air

quality impacts related to prescribed

burning.

ERP No. D–AFS–L65236–OR Rating

LO, Santiam Pass Forest Health Project,

Implementation, Willamette National

Forest, McKenzie Ranger District, Linn

County, OR.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections to

the proposed project.

ERP No. D–BLM–G65061–NM Rating

LO, Rosewell Resource Area

Management Plan and Carlsbad

Resource Area Management Plan

Amendment, Implementation, Quay,

Curry, DeBaca, Roosevelt, Lincoln,

Guadalupe, Chaves, Eddy, and Lea

Counties, NM.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections and

supported the preferred alternative. For

clarification EPA requested that the air

impact analysis be expanded to include

definitive effects of oil and gas

operations on air quality and consider

the cumulative impacts of 23,000 wells

on the 2 resource areas.

ERP No. D–BLM–J60016–WY Rating

EC2, Kenetech/PacifiCorp Windpower

Development Project, Construction of a

500–MW Windplant and 230-kV

Transmission Line between Arlington

and Hanna, Right-of-Way Grant, COE

Section 404 Permit and Special-UsePermit, Carbon County, WY.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

concerns based on potential adverse
19916 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 77 / Friday, April 21, 1995 / Notices

impacts of the proposed project on

raptors.

ERP No. D–NPS–D61039–PA Rating

LO, White-Tailed Deer Management

Plan, Implementation, Gettysburg

National Military Park and Eisenhower

Historic Site, Adams County, PA.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections to

the proposed action, but suggested the

Final EIS include reproduction

intervention methods which are

currently Food and Drug Administration

approved (Alternative 2B and 4).

ERP No. D–NPS–E61071–FL Rating

EC1, Timucuan Ecological and Historic

Preserve, General Management Plan and

Development Concept Plans,

Implementation, Fort Caroline National

Memorial Area, Duval County, FL.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

concerns over potential project impacts.

EPA recommended that the FEIS

address guidelines regarding ORV use

on the natural resource portions of the

Preserve.

ERP No. D–USN–K11028–CA Rating

EO2/EC2, Long Beach Naval Hospital

Base Disposal and Reuse,

Implementation, City of Long Beach,

CA.

Summary

EPA expressed environmental

objections to the ‘‘Retail Alternative’’

due to air quality impacts. EPA had

environmental concerns with the

remaining alternatives. The DEIS is

lacking a comprehensive air quality

analysis, although it is exempt from a

conformity determination.

Final EISs

ERP No. F–AFS–J67014–UT, Gardner

Canyon Gypsum Open Pit Mine,

Development and Operation, Special

Use Permit and Possible COE Section

404 Permit, Mount Nebo Wilderness

Area, Unita National Forest, Jaub

County, UT.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections to

the proposed project.

ERP No. F–AFS–L61198–OR,

Washington Analysis Area/Baker City

Municipal Watershed Project,

Implementation, Wallowa-Whitman

National Forest, Baker Ranger District,

Baker County, OR.

Summary

EPA expressed no objection to the

preferred alternative as described in the

FEIS. No formal written comment letter

was sent to the preparing agency.

ERP No. F–DOA–D81024–MD,

Beltsville Agricultural Research Center,

Construction of an Office Complex and

Site Selection, Prince Georges County,

MD.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections to

the proposed project.

ERP No. F–NPS–K61131–00, Lake

Mead National Recreation Area,

Management of Burros, Implementation,

Clark Co., NV and Mohave Co., AZ.

Summary

EPA expressed lack of objections to

the proposed action.

Dated: April 18, 1995.

William D. Dickerson,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 95–9929 Filed 4–20–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

[ER–FRL–4722–3]

Environmental Impact Statements;

Notice of Availability

Responsible Agency: Office of Federal

Activities, General Information (202)

260–5076 OR (202) 260–5075. Weekly

receipt of Environmental Impact

Statements Filed April 10, 1995

Through April 14, 1995 Pursuant to 40

CFR 1506.9.

EIS No. 950113, FINAL EIS, DOE, CO,

Flatiron-Erie 115-kV Electrical

Transmission Line Replacement of

Wood-Pole Structures, Construction,

Operation and Right-of-Way Grant,

City of Longmont, Larimer, Boulder

and Weld Counties, CO, Due: May 22,

1995, Contact: Rodney Jones (303)

490–7200. Published FR—03–31–95—

Refiled/Due Date Correction.

EIS No. 950133, FINAL SUPPLEMENT,

AFS, CA, Bear Mountain Ski Resort

Expansion, (Formerly Known as

Goldmine) New Information, San

Bernardino National Forest, SpecialUse-Permit and Possible COE Section

404 Permit, San Bernardino County,

CA, Due: May 22, 1995, Contact: Hal

Seyden (909) 383–5588.

EIS No. 950134, FINAL EIS, FHW, OK,

OK–99/OK–3E/US 377 North of Ada

Transportation Corridor

Reconstruction, Funding, COE

Section 404 and NPDES Permits,

Pontotoc and Seminole Cos., OK, Due:

May 22, 1995, Contact: Gary E. Larsen

(405) 231–4724.

EIS No. 950135, FINAL EIS, USA, NC,

Military Ocean Terminal Navigation

Basins and Entrance Channels

Improvements, Implementation,

Sunny Point, Brunswick and New

Hanover Counties, NC, Due: May 22,

1995, Contact: Gordon Schwerzmann

(703) 614–6605.

EIS No. 950136, DRAFT EIS, AFS, NM,

Agua/Caballos Timber Sale,

Harvesting Timber and Managing

Existing Vegetation, Implementation,

Carson National Forest, El Rito Ranger

District, Taos County, NM, Due: June

16, 1995, Contact: Audrey Kuykendall

(505) 758–6200.

EIS No. 950137, DRAFT EIS, BIA, MT,

Yellowstone Pipe Line Easement,

Construction and Operation, Renewal

of Right-of-Way (ROW) Grant for

Easement, Across the Flathead Indian

Reservation, Approval of Trust and

Allotted Lands and COE Section 404

Permit, Missoula, Lake and Sanders

Counties, MT, Due: June 05, 1995,

Contact: George Farris (202) 208–

4791.

EIS No. 950138, DRAFT EIS, AFS, WY,

Tie Hack Dam and Reservoir

Construction, Special-Use-Permit,

NPDES and COE Section 404 Permits,

Bighorn National Forest, Buffalo

Ranger District, City of Buffalo, WY,

Due: June 05, 1995, Contact: John W.

Almond (307) 672–0751.

EIS No. 950139, DRAFT EIS, EPA, CA,

Humboldt Bay Open Ocean Dredged

Material Disposal Site (ODMDs)

Designation, Samoa Peninsula,

Humboldt County, CA, Due: June 05,

1995, Contact: Allan Ota (415) 744–

1980.

EIS No. 950140, DRAFT EIS, FHW, PA,

US 22/US 322 (PA–0022 Section C02)

Lewistown Improvements,

Construction, Funding and COE

Section 404 Permit, Mifflin County,

PA, Due: June 05, 1995, Contact:

Manual A. Marks (717) 782–3461.

EIS No. 950141, DRAFT EIS, AFS, CA,

Barkley Fire Salvage Sale,

Implementation, Lower Deer Creek

Management Area, Lassen National

Forest, Almanor Ranger District,

Tehama County, CA, Due: June 05,

1995, Contact: Phillip Tuma (916)

258–2141.

EIS No. 950142, DRAFT EIS, DOE,

Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation

Policy Concerning Foreign Research

Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel,

Implementation, Due: June 20, 1995,

Contact: Charles Head (1) (800) 736–

3282.

EIS No. 950143, DRAFT EIS, MMS, AL,

TX, MS, LA, 1996 Center and Western

Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental

Shelf (OSC) Oil and Gas Lease, Sales

No. 157 (March 1996) and No. 161

(August 1996), Lease Offerings,

offshore Coastal Counties/Parishes of

Al, MS, LA and TX, Due: July 14,

1995, Contact: Archie P. Melancon

(703) 787–5471.