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
<![CDATA[
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 https://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 https://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
