[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 5 (Friday, January 7, 1994)] [Notices] [Page 1016] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 94-390] [[Page Unknown]] [Federal Register: January 7, 1994] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-4707-3] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared December 20, 1993 through December 24, 1993 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 10, 1993 (58 FR 18392). Draft EISs ERP No. D-AFS-L65212-ID Rating EO2, Prichard Creek Analysis Area, Land and Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Idaho Panhandle National Forests, Wallace Ranger District, Coeur d'Alene River, ID. Summary: EPA had environmental objections with alternatives 1, 2 & 5 based on the potential for continued and increased adverse impacts on water quality and fisheries. EPA expressed environmental concerns with alternatives 2 and 6 due to potential impacts to water quality and fisheries. Additional information is needed on baseline water quality, cumulative impacts and monitoring. ERP No. D-UAF-E11032-FL Rating EC2, Homestead Air Force Base (AFB) Disposal and Reuse, Implementation, Dade County, FL. Summary: EPA had environmental concerns with the impact due to the uncertainty associated with this proposal and the need for additional information. Depending on the particular alternative and/or mix of options which eventuate, additional NEPA evaluation may be necessary. ERP No. D-USA-L11019-WA Rating EO2, Fort Lewis and Yakima Training Center, Stationing of Mechanized or Armored Combat Forces, COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, Pierce, Thurston, Yakima and Kittitas Counties, WA. Summary: EPA had environmental objections based on the potential for adverse effects on air quality, the potential for further degradation of water bodies that are already water quality impaired, the potential for destruction of wetlands, and potential adverse effects on sage grouse. EPA requested additional analysis of air quality, water quality and wetland impacts. In addition the final EIS should discuss the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures and describe in detail the monitoring plan. Dated: January 3, 1994. William D. Dickerson, Deputy Director, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. 94-390 Filed 1-6-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE: 6560-50-P