67518 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 250 / Monday, December 31, 2001 / Notices

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[ER–FRL–6625–1]

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 May 18, 2001 (66 FR 27647).

Draft EISs

ERP No. D–BIA–K03026–CA Rating

EC2, Teayawa Energy Center,

Construction and Operation of a 600

megawatt (MW)(nominal output),

Natural-Gas-Fired, Combined-Cycle

Energy Center, On Indian Trust Land,

Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians

Tribe, Coachella Valley, Riverside

County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns and requested

additional information regarding

potential impacts to air quality, water

resources, and other alternatives

considered.

ERP No. D–BLM–K81027–NV Rating

EC2, Nevada Test and Training Range

Resource Management Plan, (formerly

Known as the Nellis Air Force Range

(NAFR)), Implementation, Clark, Nye

and Lincoln Counties, NV.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns regarding the

protection of water quality and

biological resources, especially those

dependent on water quality, and asked

that the Bureau of Land Management

incorporate pollution prevention

practices in the resource planning area.

ERP No. D–COE–E36180–MS Rating

EC2, Yalobusha River Watershed,

Demonstration Erosion Control Project,

Construction of Six FloodwaterRetarding Structures, Yazoo Basin,

Webster, Calhoun and Chickasaw

Counties, MS.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns about the longterms effects of the preferred

channelization and reservoir alternative

and whether this was the best means to

achieve project objectives.

ERP No. D–FHW–E40791–SC Rating

EO2, James E. Clyburn Connector

Project, Construction of a Two-Lane

Rural Roadway Northeast of Orangeburg

and Southwest of Sumter, Funding and

US Army COE Section 404 Permit

Issuance, Calhoun, Claredon and

Sumter Counties, SC.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental objections to the project

as proposed because of the potential

impacts to waters of the U.S., noise, and

habitat; and requested additional

information regarding these potential

impacts.

ERP No. D–NPS–E65058–GA Rating

LO, Fort Frederica National Monument

General Management Plan,

Implementation, Saint Simons Island,

Glynn County, GA.

Summary: EPA review did not

identify any potential environmental

impacts requiring substantive changes

to the proposal.

ERP No. D–NPS–G61041–AR Rating

LO, Little Rock Central High School

National Historic Site General

Management Plan, Future Management

and Use, Implementation, Little Rock,

AR.

Summary: EPA has no objection to the

selection of the preferred alternative.

ERP No. D–UAF–G11041–OK Rating

EC2, Altus Air Force Base (AFB),

Proposed Airfield Repairs,

Improvements, Adjustments to Aircrew

Training, and Installation of an

Instrument Landing System (ILS) and a

Microwave Landing System (MLS),

Jackson County, OK.

Summary: EPA has identified

environmental concerns regarding the

need to provide more balance in the

impact analysis and mitigation

measures.

ERP No. DS–FHW–H40088–IA Rating

EC2, IA–100 Extension Around Cedar

Rapids, Edgewood Road to US 30,

Reevaluation of the Project Corridor and

Changes in Environmental

Requirements, Funding and US Army

COE Section 404 Permit Issuance, Linn

County, IA.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental concerns that the project

as proposed will affect the Rock Island

Preserve both as a park and as habitat

for the Byssus Skipper, a state

threatened species of butterfly. EPA

requested additional information

regarding the design of the preferred

alternative so impacts to the Preserve,

the butterfly, wetlands and floodplains

may be minimized.

Final EISs

ERP No. F–COE–G39033–LA West Bay

Sediment Diversion Channel

Construction Project, Funding,

Plaquemines Parish, LA.

Summary: EPA has no further

comments to offer on the Final EIS and

has no objections to the selection of the

lead agency’s preferred alternative.

ERP No. F–FHW–F40223–MN I–494

Reconstruction Corridor Study, I–394 on

the west to the Minnesota River,

Funding and US Army COE Section 404

Permit Issuance, Hennepin County, MN.

Summary: EPA expressed

environmental objections that the final

EIS does not present an adequate

wetland mitigation plan and that

wetland impacts have increased

substantially. Until an adequate wetland

mitigation plan is developed, EPA

would object to the issuance of a Clean

Water Act (CWA) Section 404 Permit for

the Preferred Alternative identified in

the FEIS.

ERP No. F–FHW–K40239–CA

Interstate 215 (I–215) Transportation

Improvements, from the short segments

of CA–60 and CA–91 in the Cities of

Riverside andMoreno Valley, Funding,

Riverside County, CA.

Summary: EPA expressed continuing

environmental concerns that the project

will provide only marginal relief to

congestion while compounding the poor

air quality in the region. EPA requested

additional air quality information be

included in the ROD.

ERP No. F–NPS–K61151–CA Lassen

Volcanic National Park General

Management Plan, Implementation,

Lassen, Plumas, Shasta and Tehama

Counties, CA.

Summary: No formal comment letter

was sent to the preparing agency.

Dated: December 20, 2001.

Joseph C. Montgomery,

Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office

of Federal Activities.

[FR Doc. 01–32038 Filed 12–28–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–7123–6]

Good Neighbor Environmental Board

Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The next meeting of the Good

Neighbor Environmental Board, a

federal advisory committee that reports

to the President and Congress on

environmental and infrastructure

projects along the U.S. border with

Mexico, will take place in Washington,

DC on January 23 and 24, 2002. It is

open to the public. The meeting will be

preceded by a new member orientation

session on January 22.