United States Section; Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact for Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System in the Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project, Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy Counties, TX, 67754-67756 [E7-23029]

Download as PDF rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES 67754 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 230 / Friday, November 30, 2007 / Notices contract waiting to be executed. Contract was executed on May 21, 2007. 33. Uintah Water Conservancy District, Jensen Unit, Central Utah Project, Utah: Temporary water service contract for 2,520 acre-feet of unsubscribed Jensen Unit M&I water. Contract was executed on July 23, 2007. 34. Weber Basin Water Conservancy District, Weber Basin Project, Utah: Contract providing for the District to repay to the United States 15 percent of the cost of Phase I SOD modifications to Arthur V. Watkins Dam. Contract was executed in September 2007. Great Plains Region: Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 36900, Federal Building, 316 North 26th Street, Billings, Montana 59101, telephone 406–247–7752. New contract action: 57. Big Horn Canal ID, Boysen Unit, P–SMBP, Wyoming: Big Horn Canal ID has requested a renewal of their longterm water service contract. Modified contract actions: 12. Savage ID, P–SMBP, Montana: The district is currently seeking title transfer. The contract is subject to renewal pending outcome of the title transfer process. The existing interim contract is due to expire in May 2008. Preparing to renew long-term contract upon request by the Savage ID. 27. LeClair-Riverton ID, Boysen Unit, P–SMBP, Wyoming: Contract renewal of long-term water service contract. 56. Turtle Lake ID, Garrison Diversion Unit, North Dakota: Turtle Lake ID has requested a water service contract under the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000 as part of the Garrison Diversion Unit. Discontinued contract action: 50. Twin Lakes Reservoir and Canal Company, Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado: Consideration of a request for a long-term contract for the use of excess capacity in the FryingpanArkansas Project. Completed contract actions: 5. City of Rapid City, Rapid Valley Unit, P–SMBP, South Dakota: Contract renewal for storage capacity in Pactola Reservoir. A temporary (1 year not to exceed 10,000 acre-feet) water service contract has been executed with the City of Rapid City, Rapid Valley Unit, for use of water from Pactola Reservoir. A longterm storage contract for 49,000 acre-feet has been negotiated with the City, and a final draft of the contract has been transmitted to the City for approval by their City Council. The contract was executed July 31, 2007. 6. Mid-Dakota Rural Water System, Inc., South Dakota: Pursuant to the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to make grants VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 Nov 29, 2007 Jkt 214001 and loans to Mid-Dakota Rural Water System, Inc., a non-profit corporation for the planning and construction of a rural water supply system. Construction of the rural water supply system was completed in September 2006. The contract was amended on August 31, 2007, to convert payments from monthly to annually. 10. Fort Clark ID, P–SMBP, North Dakota: Negotiation of water service contract to continue delivery of project water to the district. The contract was executed on July 19, 2007. 17. Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado: Consideration of requests for long-term contracts for the use of excess capacity in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project from the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, the City of Aurora, and the Colorado Springs Utilities. The contract with the City of Aurora was executed on September 12, 2007. Dated: October 24, 2007. Roseann Gonzales, Director, Office of Program and Policy Services, Denver Office. [FR Doc. E7–23230 Filed 11–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO United States Section; Notice of Availability of a Final Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact for Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System in the Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project, Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy Counties, TX United States Section, International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico. ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment (EA) and Final Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). AGENCY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality Final Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508), and the United States Section, International Boundary and Water Commission’s (USIBWC) Operational Procedures for Implementing Section 102 of NEPA, published in the Federal Register September 2, 1981, (46 FR 44083); the USIBWC hereby gives notice of availability of the Final Environmental Assessment and FONSI for Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System, in the Lower SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Rio Grande Flood Control Project, located in Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy Counties, Texas. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Borunda, Environmental Protection Specialist, Environmental Management Division, United States Section, International Boundary and Water Commission; 4171 N. Mesa, C– 100; El Paso, Texas 79902. Telephone: (915) 832–4767; e-mail: daniel.borunda@ibwc.state.gov. DATES: The Final EA and FONSI will be available November 30, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The USIBWC is authorized to construct, operate, and maintain any project or works projected by the United States of America on the Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project (LRGFCP), as authorized by the Act of the 74th Congress, Sess. I Ch. 561 (H.R. 6453), approved August 19, 1935 (49 Stat. 660), and codified at 22 U.S.C. Section 277, 277a, 277b, 277c, and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto. The LRGFCP was constructed to protect urban, suburban, and highly developed irrigated farmland along the Rio Grande delta in the United States and Mexico. The USIBWC, in cooperation with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, prepared this EA for the proposed action to improve flood control along sections of the Main and North Floodways Levee System located in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties, Texas. This levee system is part of the LRGFCP that extends approximately 180 miles from the Town ˜ of Penitas in south Texas to the Gulf of Mexico. The Main and North Floodway Levee system extends approximately 75 levee miles, downstream from Anzalduas Dam, and extending near the town of Mercedes to the Laguna Madre northwest of Arroyo City, Texas. Proposed Action Alternatives to the Proposed Action The Proposed Action would increase the flood containment capacity of the Main and North Floodways Levee System by raising the elevation of a number of levee segments for improved flood protection. Fill material would be added to the existing levee to bring height to its original design specifications, or to meet a 2 feet freeboard design criterion. Typical height increases in improvement areas would be less than 1 foot and would not require expansion of the existing levee footprint. In some locations, up to 2 feet of fill material would be placed on top of the E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 230 / Friday, November 30, 2007 / Notices levee, extending the levee footprint up to a maximum of 12 feet from the current toe of the levee. This expansion would take place along the approximately 20 foot service corridor currently utilized for levee maintenance, inside the maintained floodway, and entirely within the flood control project right-of-way. In some instances, adjustment in levee slope would be made to eliminate the need for levee footprint expansion, when required due to engineering considerations or for protection of biological or cultural resources. The need for excavation outside the levee structure is not anticipated. Summary of Findings Pursuant to NEPA guidance (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500–1508), the President’s Council on Environmental Quality issued regulations for NEPA implementation which included provisions for both the content and procedural aspects of the required Environmental Assessment. The USIBWC completed an EA of the potential environmental consequences of raising the Main and North Floodways Levee System to meet current requirements for flood control. The EA, which supports this Finding of No Significant Impact, evaluated the Proposed Action and No Action Alternative. Levee System Evaluation No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative was evaluated as the single alternative action to the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative would retain the current configuration of the Main and North Floodways Levee System, with no impacts to biological and cultural resources, land use, community resources, or environmental health issues. In terms of flood protection, however, current containment capacity under the No Action Alternative may be insufficient to fully control Rio Grande flooding under severe storm events, with associated risks to personal safety and property. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Proposed Action Biological Resources Improvements to the levee system require placement of fill material that would affect grassed areas at levee footprint expansion locations. All expansion would take place along the current levee service corridor, limiting vegetation removal to invasive-species grasslands; this grass cover is expected to be rapidly re-established after project completion. VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 Nov 29, 2007 Jkt 214001 No significant effects are anticipated on wildlife habitat in the vicinity of the levee system, including potential habitat for threatened and endangered species. While approximately 17 percent of levee system is adjacent to natural resources conservation areas, only a small fraction would fall within levee improvement areas. In areas requiring levee footprint expansion, no woodland communities would be impacted; impacts on vegetation would be limited to nonnative grasslands along the levee, of very limited value as wildlife habitat. No wetlands are located within the potential levee expansion area. Cultural Resources Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System are not expected to adversely affect known archaeological or historical resources. Typically, placement of fill material over the existing levee would not expand the levee footprint; when levee footprint expansion is needed, expansion would take place within the service corridor currently used for levee maintenance. High-Probability Areas (HPAs) identified along the levee system would be located outside the improvement areas, with minor exceptions. In areas where HPAs are located near improvement areas, the need for footprint expansion would be eliminated by adjusting levee slope to retain current location of the toe of the levee. Cultural resources located in the general vicinity of the levee system include historic age structures. Potential historic-age resources near the levee system would not be affected because most of those resources are located outside of the floodway, and away from potential levee footprint expansion areas. Only irrigation canals and minor irrigation structures, such as weir gates and standpipes, are located within or near the levee service corridor where footprint expansion would take place; irrigation canals and nearly all irrigation structures would be retained in their current condition. Water Resources Improvements to the levee system would increase flood containment capacity to control the design flood event with a negligible increase in water surface elevation. Levee footprint expansion would not affect water resources. Land Use Footprint levee expansion, where required, would take place completely within the existing floodway and along the levee service corridor. No urban or PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67755 agricultural lands would be affected. Impacts to natural resources conservation areas would be limited to grassland areas. Community Resources In terms of socioeconomic resources, the influx of federal funds into Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties from the levee improvement project would have a positive but minor local economic impact. The impact would be limited to the construction period, and represent less than 1 percent of the annual county employment, income and sales values. No adverse impacts to disproportionately high minority and low-income populations were identified for construction activities. A moderate increase in utilization of public roads would be required during construction; a temporary increase in access road use would be required for equipment mobilization to staging areas. Environmental Health Issues Estimated air emissions of five criteria pollutants during construction represent less than 1.1 percent of the annual emissions inventory of Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties. There would be a moderate increase in ambient noise levels due to construction activities. No long-term and regular exposure is expected above noise threshold values. A database search indicated that no waste storage and disposal sites were within the proposed Main and North Floodway Levee Project area, and none would affect, or be affected, by the levee improvement project. Best Management Practices When warranted due to engineering considerations, or for protection of biological or cultural resources, the need for levee footprint expansion would be eliminated by levee slope adjustment. Best management practices during construction would include development of a storm water pollution prevention plan to avoid impacts to receiving waters, and use of sediment barriers and soil wetting to minimize erosion and dust. To protect vegetation cover, both the modified levee and construction corridor would be re-vegetated with native herbaceous species. To protect wildlife, construction activities would be scheduled to occur, to the extent possible, outside the March to August bird migratory season. Availability Single hard copies of the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact may be E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1 67756 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 230 / Friday, November 30, 2007 / Notices Dated: November 20, 2007. Allen Thomas, Attorney Advisor. [FR Doc. E7–23029 Filed 11–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7010–01–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1131–1134 (Preliminary)] Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip From Brazil, China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)) (the Act), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports from Brazil, China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates of polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip provided for in subheading 3920.62.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). Commencement of Final Phase Investigations Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission’s rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the Federal Register as provided in section 207.21 of the Commission’s rules, upon notice from the Department of Commerce (Commerce) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under section 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in the investigations under section 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Background obtained by request at the above address. Electronic copies may also be obtained from the USIBWC Home Page at http://www.ibwc.state.gov. AGENCY: On September 28, 2007, a petition was filed with the Commission and Commerce by DuPont Teijin Films, Hopewell, VA; Mitsubishi Polyester Film of America, Greer, SC; SKC America, Inc., Covington, GA; and Toray Plastics (America), Inc., North Kingston, RI, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured and threatened with further material injury by reason of LTFV imports of polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip from Brazil, China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates. Accordingly, effective September 28, 2007, the Commission instituted antidumping duty investigation Nos. 731–TA–1131–1134 (Preliminary). Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of October 5, 2007 (72 FR 57068). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on October 19, 2007, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determinations in these investigations to the Secretary of Commerce on November 13, 2007. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3962 (November 2007), entitled Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from Brazil, China, Thailand, and the United Arab Emirates: Investigation Nos. 731–TA– 1131–1134 (Preliminary). By order of the Commission. Issued: November 21, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7–23223 Filed 11–29–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR § 207.2(f)). VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:27 Nov 29, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 [Inv. No. 332–494] U.S.-Israel Agricultural Trade: Probable Economic Effect on U.S. and Israeli Agricultural Industries of Conducting Such Trade in a Free Trade Environment United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of investigation and scheduling of hearing. SUMMARY: Following receipt on October 23, 2007, of a request from the United States Trade Representative (USTR) under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)), the Commission instituted investigation No. 332–494, U.S.-Israel Agricultural Trade: Probable Economic Effect on U.S. and Israeli Agricultural Industries of Conducting Such Trade in a Free Trade Environment. DATES: December 21, 2007: Deadline for filing requests to appear at public hearing. January 3, 2008: Deadline for filing pre-hearing briefs and statements. January 10, 2008: Public hearing. January 16, 2008: Deadline for filing post-hearing briefs and statements. February 1, 2008: Deadline for all other submissions. April 23, 2008: Transmittal of Commission report to USTR. ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, including the Commission’s hearing rooms, are located in the United States International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC. All written submissions, including requests to appear at the hearing, should be addressed to the Secretary, United States International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Project leader Mark Simone (202–205– 2049 or mark.simone@usitc.gov) or deputy project leader Erick Oh (202– 205–3033 or erick.oh@usitc.gov) for information specific to this investigation. For information on the legal aspects of the investigation, contact William Gearhart of the Commission’s Office of the General Counsel at 202–205–3091 or william.gearhart@usitc.gov. The media should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, Office of External Relations at 202–205– 1819 or margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the TDD E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 230 (Friday, November 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67754-67756]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-23029]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO


United States Section; Notice of Availability of a Final 
Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact for 
Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System in the Lower 
Rio Grande Flood Control Project, Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy 
Counties, TX

AGENCY: United States Section, International Boundary and Water 
Commission, United States and Mexico.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment (EA) 
and Final Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the Council on Environmental Quality Final 
Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508), and the United States 
Section, International Boundary and Water Commission's (USIBWC) 
Operational Procedures for Implementing Section 102 of NEPA, published 
in the Federal Register September 2, 1981, (46 FR 44083); the USIBWC 
hereby gives notice of availability of the Final Environmental 
Assessment and FONSI for Improvements to the Main and North Floodways 
Levee System, in the Lower Rio Grande Flood Control Project, located in 
Hidalgo, Cameron and Willacy Counties, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Borunda, Environmental 
Protection Specialist, Environmental Management Division, United States 
Section, International Boundary and Water Commission; 4171 N. Mesa, C-
100; El Paso, Texas 79902. Telephone: (915) 832-4767; e-mail: 
daniel.borunda@ibwc.state.gov.

DATES: The Final EA and FONSI will be available November 30, 2007.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The USIBWC is authorized to construct, operate, and maintain any 
project or works projected by the United States of America on the Lower 
Rio Grande Flood Control Project (LRGFCP), as authorized by the Act of 
the 74th Congress, Sess. I Ch. 561 (H.R. 6453), approved August 19, 
1935 (49 Stat. 660), and codified at 22 U.S.C. Section 277, 277a, 277b, 
277c, and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto. The LRGFCP 
was constructed to protect urban, suburban, and highly developed 
irrigated farmland along the Rio Grande delta in the United States and 
Mexico.
    The USIBWC, in cooperation with the Texas Parks and Wildlife 
Department, prepared this EA for the proposed action to improve flood 
control along sections of the Main and North Floodways Levee System 
located in Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties, Texas. This levee 
system is part of the LRGFCP that extends approximately 180 miles from 
the Town of Pe[ntilde]itas in south Texas to the Gulf of Mexico. The 
Main and North Floodway Levee system extends approximately 75 levee 
miles, downstream from Anzalduas Dam, and extending near the town of 
Mercedes to the Laguna Madre northwest of Arroyo City, Texas.

Proposed Action

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    The Proposed Action would increase the flood containment capacity 
of the Main and North Floodways Levee System by raising the elevation 
of a number of levee segments for improved flood protection. Fill 
material would be added to the existing levee to bring height to its 
original design specifications, or to meet a 2 feet freeboard design 
criterion. Typical height increases in improvement areas would be less 
than 1 foot and would not require expansion of the existing levee 
footprint.
    In some locations, up to 2 feet of fill material would be placed on 
top of the

[[Page 67755]]

levee, extending the levee footprint up to a maximum of 12 feet from 
the current toe of the levee. This expansion would take place along the 
approximately 20 foot service corridor currently utilized for levee 
maintenance, inside the maintained floodway, and entirely within the 
flood control project right-of-way. In some instances, adjustment in 
levee slope would be made to eliminate the need for levee footprint 
expansion, when required due to engineering considerations or for 
protection of biological or cultural resources. The need for excavation 
outside the levee structure is not anticipated.

Summary of Findings

    Pursuant to NEPA guidance (40 Code of Federal Regulations 1500-
1508), the President's Council on Environmental Quality issued 
regulations for NEPA implementation which included provisions for both 
the content and procedural aspects of the required Environmental 
Assessment. The USIBWC completed an EA of the potential environmental 
consequences of raising the Main and North Floodways Levee System to 
meet current requirements for flood control. The EA, which supports 
this Finding of No Significant Impact, evaluated the Proposed Action 
and No Action Alternative.

Levee System Evaluation

No Action Alternative

    The No Action Alternative was evaluated as the single alternative 
action to the Proposed Action. The No Action Alternative would retain 
the current configuration of the Main and North Floodways Levee System, 
with no impacts to biological and cultural resources, land use, 
community resources, or environmental health issues. In terms of flood 
protection, however, current containment capacity under the No Action 
Alternative may be insufficient to fully control Rio Grande flooding 
under severe storm events, with associated risks to personal safety and 
property.

Proposed Action

Biological Resources
    Improvements to the levee system require placement of fill material 
that would affect grassed areas at levee footprint expansion locations. 
All expansion would take place along the current levee service 
corridor, limiting vegetation removal to invasive-species grasslands; 
this grass cover is expected to be rapidly re-established after project 
completion.
    No significant effects are anticipated on wildlife habitat in the 
vicinity of the levee system, including potential habitat for 
threatened and endangered species. While approximately 17 percent of 
levee system is adjacent to natural resources conservation areas, only 
a small fraction would fall within levee improvement areas. In areas 
requiring levee footprint expansion, no woodland communities would be 
impacted; impacts on vegetation would be limited to non-native 
grasslands along the levee, of very limited value as wildlife habitat. 
No wetlands are located within the potential levee expansion area.
Cultural Resources
    Improvements to the Main and North Floodways Levee System are not 
expected to adversely affect known archaeological or historical 
resources. Typically, placement of fill material over the existing 
levee would not expand the levee footprint; when levee footprint 
expansion is needed, expansion would take place within the service 
corridor currently used for levee maintenance. High-Probability Areas 
(HPAs) identified along the levee system would be located outside the 
improvement areas, with minor exceptions. In areas where HPAs are 
located near improvement areas, the need for footprint expansion would 
be eliminated by adjusting levee slope to retain current location of 
the toe of the levee.
    Cultural resources located in the general vicinity of the levee 
system include historic age structures. Potential historic-age 
resources near the levee system would not be affected because most of 
those resources are located outside of the floodway, and away from 
potential levee footprint expansion areas. Only irrigation canals and 
minor irrigation structures, such as weir gates and standpipes, are 
located within or near the levee service corridor where footprint 
expansion would take place; irrigation canals and nearly all irrigation 
structures would be retained in their current condition.
Water Resources
    Improvements to the levee system would increase flood containment 
capacity to control the design flood event with a negligible increase 
in water surface elevation. Levee footprint expansion would not affect 
water resources.
Land Use
    Footprint levee expansion, where required, would take place 
completely within the existing floodway and along the levee service 
corridor. No urban or agricultural lands would be affected. Impacts to 
natural resources conservation areas would be limited to grassland 
areas.
Community Resources
    In terms of socioeconomic resources, the influx of federal funds 
into Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties from the levee improvement 
project would have a positive but minor local economic impact. The 
impact would be limited to the construction period, and represent less 
than 1 percent of the annual county employment, income and sales 
values. No adverse impacts to disproportionately high minority and low-
income populations were identified for construction activities. A 
moderate increase in utilization of public roads would be required 
during construction; a temporary increase in access road use would be 
required for equipment mobilization to staging areas.
Environmental Health Issues
    Estimated air emissions of five criteria pollutants during 
construction represent less than 1.1 percent of the annual emissions 
inventory of Hidalgo, Cameron, and Willacy Counties. There would be a 
moderate increase in ambient noise levels due to construction 
activities. No long-term and regular exposure is expected above noise 
threshold values. A database search indicated that no waste storage and 
disposal sites were within the proposed Main and North Floodway Levee 
Project area, and none would affect, or be affected, by the levee 
improvement project.
Best Management Practices
    When warranted due to engineering considerations, or for protection 
of biological or cultural resources, the need for levee footprint 
expansion would be eliminated by levee slope adjustment. Best 
management practices during construction would include development of a 
storm water pollution prevention plan to avoid impacts to receiving 
waters, and use of sediment barriers and soil wetting to minimize 
erosion and dust.
    To protect vegetation cover, both the modified levee and 
construction corridor would be re-vegetated with native herbaceous 
species. To protect wildlife, construction activities would be 
scheduled to occur, to the extent possible, outside the March to August 
bird migratory season.

Availability

    Single hard copies of the Final Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact may be

[[Page 67756]]

obtained by request at the above address. Electronic copies may also be 
obtained from the USIBWC Home Page at http://www.ibwc.state.gov.

    Dated: November 20, 2007.
Allen Thomas,
Attorney Advisor.
[FR Doc. E7-23029 Filed 11-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7010-01-P