Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Arctic Deep Draft Ports Navigation Improvements Feasibility Study, 29336-29338 [2013-11850]
Download as PDF
29336
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2013 / Notices
b. Add the following as the final
paragraph to section IX. Required
Waivers to Law and Regulation, 2. Title
5, Code of Federal Regulations: ‘‘Part
752, sections 752.201, and 752.401:
Coverage. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except those with veterans’ preference.’’
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
3. ERDC (63 FR 14580–14599, March 25,
1998)
a. Add the following to section IX.
Required Waivers to Law and
Regulation, A. Waivers to Title 5, U.S.
Code: ‘‘Chapter 75, sections 7501(1),
7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii);
Adverse Actions—Definitions. Waived
to the extent necessary to allow
extended probationary periods and to
permit termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except for those with veterans’
preference.’’
b. Add the following to section IX.
Required Waivers to Law and
Regulation, B. Waivers to Title 5, Code
of Federal Regulations: ‘‘Part 752,
sections 752.201, and 752.401:
Coverage. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except those with veterans’ preference.’’
4. MRMC (63 FR 10440–10462, March 3,
1998)
a. Add the following to section IX.
Required Waivers to Law and
Regulation, 1. Waivers to Title 5, U.S.
Code: ‘‘Chapter 75, sections 7501(1),
7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii);
Adverse Actions—Definitions. Waived
to the extent necessary to allow
extended probationary periods and to
permit termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except for those with veterans’
preference.’’
b. Add the following as the final
paragraph to section IX. Required
Waivers to Law and Regulation, 2. Title
5, Code of Federal Regulations: ‘‘Part
752, sections 752.201, and 752.401:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 May 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
Coverage. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except those with veterans’ preference.’’
5. CERDEC (66 FR 54872–54899,
October 30, 2001)
a. Add the following to section IX.
Required Waivers to Law and
Regulation, A. Waivers to Title 5, U.S.
Code: ‘‘Chapter 75, sections 7501(1),
7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii);
Adverse Actions—Definitions. Waived
to the extent necessary to allow
extended probationary periods and to
permit termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except for those with veterans’
preference.’’
b. Add the following to section IX.
Required Waivers to Law and
Regulation, B. Waivers to Title 5, Code
of Federal Regulations: ‘‘Part 752,
sections 752.201, and 752.401:
Coverage. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except those with veterans’ preference.’’
6. NRL (64 FR 33970–34046, June 24,
1999)
a. Add the following as the final box
on the left side of Appendix A: Required
Waivers to Law and Regulation chart,
Title 5, U. S. Code: ‘‘Chapter 75,
sections 7501(1), 7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and
7511(a)(1)(C)(ii); Adverse Actions—
Definitions. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except for those with veterans’
preference.’’
b. Add the following on the right side
of the information entered in 6.a. above
to Appendix A: Required Waivers to
Law and Regulation chart, Title 5, Code
of Federal Regulations: ‘‘Part 752,
sections 752.201, and 752.401:
Coverage. Waived to the extent
necessary to allow extended
probationary periods and to permit
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
termination during the extended
probationary period without using
adverse action procedures for those
individuals serving a probationary
period under an initial appointment
except those with veterans’ preference.’’
Dated: May 15, 2013.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2013–11952 Filed 5–17–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement for Arctic Deep Draft
Ports Navigation Improvements
Feasibility Study
Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Notice of intent.
The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) announces its
intention to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) to study the
feasibility of improving the navigation
infrastructure in the vicinity of Norton
Sound and the Bering Strait with a focus
on existing infrastructure at Nome,
possible infrastructure at Cape Riley
near Teller, and improved infrastructure
at Point Spencer at Port Clarence,
Alaska. This study will be performed
through a partnership between USACE
and the State of Alaska, Department of
Transportation. The existing
infrastructure in this region of Alaska is
presently not capable of meeting
existing or anticipated navigation
demands for multinational, Federal,
state, and local interests. Of particular
concern in this region is the ability to
provide a systematic approach to
meeting navigation requirements in this
region in response to a changing climate
and thus an increasing need for
environmentally and responsibly
planned infrastructure. The EIS will
address the potential for positive and
negative environmental impacts of
construction, operation, and
maintenance of marine infrastructure
serving the Norton Sound and Bering
Strait region. USACE will hold scoping
meetings in Nome and Teller, Alaska, in
an effort to better define the issues
associated with navigation in this region
of Alaska. Teleconferencing or VTC will
be set up as available to accommodate
stakeholders unable to be present at the
scoping meetings. Scoping will be
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2013 / Notices
ongoing throughout the feasibility study
process.
DATES: A scoping meeting will be held
in Nome and Teller, Alaska the second
week in June. A summary of comments
received as a result of scoping meetings
held in June will be forwarded to
participants as requested. Scoping
meetings will be advertised in local
newspapers as necessary.
ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or
suggestions on the scope of the EIS to:
Mr. Michael Salyer, NEPA Coordinator,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska
District, EN–G–ER, P.O. Box 6898, Joint
Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK 99506–
0898; Phone: 907–753–2690; Fax: (907)
753–2625, email
michael.9.salyer@usace.army.mil
(please use ‘‘NOI Comments;
Environmental Impact Statement for
Arctic Deep Draft Ports Navigation
Improvements Feasibility Study).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information or questions concerning the
proposed project, contact: Ms. Lorraine
Cordova, Plan Formulator, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, PM–
C–PL, P.O. Box 6898, Joint Base
Elmendorf-Richardson, AK 99506–0898;
Phone: 907–753–5619; Fax: (907) 753–
2625; email:
Lorraine.A.Cordova@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
The study area is part of the Seward
Peninsula on the western coast of
Alaska and includes the general area of
Nome/Port Clarence and Teller.
Currently, Nome serves as the supply,
service, and transportation center for the
Bering Strait region. Nome cannot meet
the existing demand for maritime
infrastructure, while demand on that
infrastructure continues to increase.
Commerce, safety, national security and
oil spill response capability have
already been identified as issues
needing to be addressed in the United
States as an Arctic nation.
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
The purpose of this study is to
identify a practicable and
environmentally responsible solution to
meeting the existing and future
maritime infrastructure needs in the
Bering Sea Region and possibly the
United States Arctic. The existing
maritime infrastructure in the vicinity of
Nome is not adequate to accommodate
the need for an efficient and safe harbor
appropriate to current vessel traffic in
the Arctic Region of the United States.
The State of Alaska, Department of
Transportation is working with the U. S.
Army Corps of Engineers in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 May 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
investigating the need for expanding the
existing maritime infrastructure within
the Bering Sea Region. This region of
Alaska has been identified as having the
potential for improving the northernmost, naturally occurring deep water
port. At present, the region does not
appropriately and safely accommodate
the needs of maritime users already
located at or transiting the area.
This project was authorized by
general language in Section 5007 of
Public Law 119–114, the Water
Resources Development Act of 2007.
The Study Authority is the House
Public Works Committee Resolution for
Rivers and Harbors in Alaska, adopted
December 2, 1970. The resolution states:
‘‘Resolved by the Committee on
Public Works of the House of
Representatives, United States, that the
Board of Engineers for Rivers and
Harbors is hereby requested to review
the reports of the Chief of Engineers on
Rivers and Harbors in Alaska, published
as House Document Numbered 414,
83rd Congress, 2nd Session; and other
pertinent reports, with a view to
determining whether any modifications
of the recommendations contained
herein are advisable at the present
time.’’
This EIS will assess the potential
environmental impacts of constructing,
operating, and maintaining existing and
possibly new navigation infrastructure
in the Norton Sound and Bering Strait
Region. The EIS will aid decision
making on the Arctic Deep Draft Ports
study by evaluating the environmental
impacts of the range of reasonable
alternatives, as well as providing a
means for public input into the decision
making process. USACE is committed to
ensuring that the public has ample
opportunity to participate in this
review.
Preliminary Alternatives
Consistent with NEPA
implementation requirements, this EIS
will assess the range of reasonable
alternatives regarding constructing,
operating, maintaining, and funding a
proposed project that results from the
study. The following types of
alternatives have been identified for the
region and are subject to modification in
response to comments received during
the public scoping process.
Structural Alternatives: This set of
alternatives will investigate and
describe possible harbor construction or
improvement alternatives. Types of
structural solutions could include, but
are not limited to, rubble mound
breakwaters, dredging, Search and
Rescue infrastructure, disaster response
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29337
infrastructure, mooring basins, modified
entrance channels, navigation aids, etc.
Nonstructural Alternatives:
Nonstructural alternatives could
include, but are not limited to, solutions
like traffic management and Port
Authority establishment.
No Action Alternative: Under the ‘‘no
action’’ alternative, the Norton Sound
Region would continue to encounter the
haphazard navigation scenario that
presently exists in a challenging
maritime environment associated with
the Bering Sea and other Arctic waters.
USACE would appreciate comments
regarding whether there are additional
alternatives for the Environmental
Impact Statement for Arctic Deep Draft
Ports Navigation Improvements
Feasibility Study that should be
considered.
Identification of Environmental and
Other Issues
USACE intends to address the
following environmental issues when
assessing the potential environmental
impacts of the alternatives in this EIS.
Additional issues may be identified as
a result of the scoping process. USACE
invites comment from Federal agencies;
state, local, and tribal governments; and
the general public on these and any
other issues that should be considered
in the EIS:
• Potential impacts on health from
the existing usage of the area by
transiting and local vessels.
• Potential impacts on health, both
positive and negative, as a result of
project implementation.
• Potential impacts to workers during
the construction of the facilities.
• Potential impacts to surface water,
tidelands and fauna including turbidity
from construction activities.
• Potential impacts on air quality
from emissions and from noise during
construction and operations.
• Potential cumulative impacts of the
past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions including
impacts resulting from activities foreign
and domestic, multinational, Federal,
state, and local.
• Potential impacts to historically
significant properties, if present, and on
access to traditional use areas.
• Potential impacts on local, regional,
or national resources from materials and
utilities required for construction and
operation.
• Potential impacts on ecological
resources, including threatened and
endangered species and water quality.
• Potential impacts on local
employment, income, population,
housing, and public services from
harbor construction and operations.
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
29338
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2013 / Notices
NEPA Process
The EIS for the proposed project will
be prepared pursuant to the NEPA of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), Council
on Environmental Quality NEPA
Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508),
and USACE’s NEPA Implementing
Procedures (33 CFR parts 230 and 325).
Following the publication of this Notice
of Intent, USACE will continue the
scoping process, prepare and distribute
the draft EIS for public review, hold
public meetings to solicit public
comment on the draft EIS, and publish
a final EIS. Not less than 30 days after
the publication of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s
Notice of Availability of the final EIS,
USACE may issue a Record of Decision
(ROD) documenting its decision
concerning the proposed action.
EIS Schedule
The draft EIS is scheduled to be
published no sooner than December
2013. A 45-day comment period on the
draft EIS is planned, which will include
public meetings to receive comments.
Availability of the draft EIS, the dates of
the public comment period, and
information about public meetings will
be announced in the Federal Register
and in the local news media.
The final EIS for the Environmental
Impact Statement for Arctic Deep Draft
Ports Navigation Improvements
Feasibility Study is scheduled for no
sooner than November 2014. A ROD
would be issued no sooner than 30 days
after the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s notice of availability of the
final EIS is published in the Federal
Register.
Gregory Schmidt,
Deputy Chief, Engineering Division.
[FR Doc. 2013–11850 Filed 5–17–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Applications for New Award; Technical
Assistance To Improve State Data
Capacity—National Technical
Assistance Center To Improve State
Capacity To Accurately Collect and
Report IDEA Data
Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, Department of
Education.
ACTION: Notice.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
Overview Information
Technical Assistance to Improve State
Data Capacity—National Technical
Assistance Center to Improve State
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:09 May 17, 2013
Jkt 229001
Capacity to Accurately Collect and
Report IDEA Data Notice inviting
applications for a new award for fiscal
year (FY) 2013.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA) Number: 84.373Y.
DATES:
Application Available: May 20, 2013.
Deadline for Transmittal of
Applications: July 19, 2013.
Deadline for Intergovernmental
Review: September 17, 2013.
Full Text of Announcement
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Purpose of Program: The purpose of
the Technical Assistance to Improve
State Data Capacity program is to
improve the capacity of States to meet
their Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) data collection
and reporting requirements under
sections 616 and 618 of the IDEA.
Funding for the program is authorized
under section 611(c)(1) of the IDEA,
which gives the Secretary the authority
to reserve funds appropriated under
section 611 of the IDEA to provide
technical assistance (TA) authorized
under section 616(i) of the IDEA.
Section 616(i) requires the Secretary to
review the data collection and analysis
capacity of States to ensure that data
and information determined necessary
for implementation of sections 616 and
618 of the IDEA are collected, analyzed,
and accurately reported. It also requires
the Secretary to provide TA, where
needed, to improve the capacity of
States to meet the data collection
requirements under the IDEA.
Priority: This priority is from the
notice of final priority for this program,
published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register.
Absolute Priority: For FY 2013 and
any subsequent year in which we make
awards from the list of unfunded
applicants from this competition, this
priority is an absolute priority. Under 34
CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only
applications that meet this priority.
This priority is:
National Technical Assistance Center
To Improve State Capacity To
Accurately Collect and Report IDEA
Data
The purpose of this priority is to fund
a cooperative agreement to support the
establishment and operation of a
National Technical Assistance Center to
Improve State Capacity to Accurately
Collect and Report IDEA Data (Data
Center). The Data Center will provide
TA to improve the capacity of States to
meet IDEA data collection and reporting
requirements by:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(a) Improving data infrastructure by
coordinating and promoting
communication and effective data
governance strategies among relevant
State offices including State educational
agencies (SEAs) and State lead agencies,
local educational agencies (LEAs),
schools, early intervention service (EIS)
providers, and TA providers to improve
the quality of the IDEA data;
(b) Using results from the
Department’s auto-generated error
reports to communicate with State IDEA
Data Managers and other relevant
stakeholders in the State (e.g., EDFacts
Coordinator) about data that appear to
be inaccurate and provide support to the
State (as needed) to enhance current
State validation procedures to prevent
future errors in State-reported IDEA
data;
(c) Using the results of the
Department’s review of State-reported
data to help States ensure that data are
collected and reported from all
programs providing special education
and related services within the State;
(d) Addressing personnel training
needs by developing effective
informational tools (e.g., training
modules) and resources (e.g., cross-walk
documents about IDEA and non-IDEA
data elements) about data collection and
reporting requirements that States can
use to train personnel in schools,
programs, agencies, and districts;
(e) Supporting States in submitting
data into EDFacts by coordinating with
EDFacts TA providers (i.e., Partner
Support Center; see www2.ed.gov/
about/inits/ed/edfacts/support.html)
about IDEA-specific data reporting
requirements and providing EDFacts
reports and TA to States to help them
improve the accuracy of their IDEA data
submissions;
(f) Improving IDEA data validation by
using results from data reviews
conducted by the Department to work
with States to generate tools (e.g.,
templates of data dashboards) that can
be used by States to accurately
communicate data to local dataconsumer groups (e.g., school boards,
the general public) and lead to
improvements in the validity and
reliability of data required by IDEA; and
(g) Using results from the
Department’s review of State-reported
Annual Performance Report (APR) data
to provide intensive and individualized
TA to improve the accuracy of
qualitative information provided in the
APR about the State’s efforts to improve
its implementation of the requirements
and purposes of IDEA, and to more
accurately target its future improvement
activities.
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 97 (Monday, May 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29336-29338]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-11850]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Arctic
Deep Draft Ports Navigation Improvements Feasibility Study
AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) announces its
intention to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to study
the feasibility of improving the navigation infrastructure in the
vicinity of Norton Sound and the Bering Strait with a focus on existing
infrastructure at Nome, possible infrastructure at Cape Riley near
Teller, and improved infrastructure at Point Spencer at Port Clarence,
Alaska. This study will be performed through a partnership between
USACE and the State of Alaska, Department of Transportation. The
existing infrastructure in this region of Alaska is presently not
capable of meeting existing or anticipated navigation demands for
multinational, Federal, state, and local interests. Of particular
concern in this region is the ability to provide a systematic approach
to meeting navigation requirements in this region in response to a
changing climate and thus an increasing need for environmentally and
responsibly planned infrastructure. The EIS will address the potential
for positive and negative environmental impacts of construction,
operation, and maintenance of marine infrastructure serving the Norton
Sound and Bering Strait region. USACE will hold scoping meetings in
Nome and Teller, Alaska, in an effort to better define the issues
associated with navigation in this region of Alaska. Teleconferencing
or VTC will be set up as available to accommodate stakeholders unable
to be present at the scoping meetings. Scoping will be
[[Page 29337]]
ongoing throughout the feasibility study process.
DATES: A scoping meeting will be held in Nome and Teller, Alaska the
second week in June. A summary of comments received as a result of
scoping meetings held in June will be forwarded to participants as
requested. Scoping meetings will be advertised in local newspapers as
necessary.
ADDRESSES: Please direct comments or suggestions on the scope of the
EIS to: Mr. Michael Salyer, NEPA Coordinator, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Alaska District, EN-G-ER, P.O. Box 6898, Joint Base
Elmendorf-Richardson, AK 99506-0898; Phone: 907-753-2690; Fax: (907)
753-2625, email michael.9.salyer@usace.army.mil (please use ``NOI
Comments; Environmental Impact Statement for Arctic Deep Draft Ports
Navigation Improvements Feasibility Study).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information or questions
concerning the proposed project, contact: Ms. Lorraine Cordova, Plan
Formulator, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District, PM-C-PL,
P.O. Box 6898, Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, AK 99506-0898; Phone:
907-753-5619; Fax: (907) 753-2625; email:
Lorraine.A.Cordova@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The study area is part of the Seward Peninsula on the western coast
of Alaska and includes the general area of Nome/Port Clarence and
Teller. Currently, Nome serves as the supply, service, and
transportation center for the Bering Strait region. Nome cannot meet
the existing demand for maritime infrastructure, while demand on that
infrastructure continues to increase. Commerce, safety, national
security and oil spill response capability have already been identified
as issues needing to be addressed in the United States as an Arctic
nation.
Purpose and Need for Agency Action
The purpose of this study is to identify a practicable and
environmentally responsible solution to meeting the existing and future
maritime infrastructure needs in the Bering Sea Region and possibly the
United States Arctic. The existing maritime infrastructure in the
vicinity of Nome is not adequate to accommodate the need for an
efficient and safe harbor appropriate to current vessel traffic in the
Arctic Region of the United States. The State of Alaska, Department of
Transportation is working with the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers in
investigating the need for expanding the existing maritime
infrastructure within the Bering Sea Region. This region of Alaska has
been identified as having the potential for improving the northern-
most, naturally occurring deep water port. At present, the region does
not appropriately and safely accommodate the needs of maritime users
already located at or transiting the area.
This project was authorized by general language in Section 5007 of
Public Law 119-114, the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
The Study Authority is the House Public Works Committee Resolution
for Rivers and Harbors in Alaska, adopted December 2, 1970. The
resolution states:
``Resolved by the Committee on Public Works of the House of
Representatives, United States, that the Board of Engineers for Rivers
and Harbors is hereby requested to review the reports of the Chief of
Engineers on Rivers and Harbors in Alaska, published as House Document
Numbered 414, 83rd Congress, 2nd Session; and other pertinent reports,
with a view to determining whether any modifications of the
recommendations contained herein are advisable at the present time.''
This EIS will assess the potential environmental impacts of
constructing, operating, and maintaining existing and possibly new
navigation infrastructure in the Norton Sound and Bering Strait Region.
The EIS will aid decision making on the Arctic Deep Draft Ports study
by evaluating the environmental impacts of the range of reasonable
alternatives, as well as providing a means for public input into the
decision making process. USACE is committed to ensuring that the public
has ample opportunity to participate in this review.
Preliminary Alternatives
Consistent with NEPA implementation requirements, this EIS will
assess the range of reasonable alternatives regarding constructing,
operating, maintaining, and funding a proposed project that results
from the study. The following types of alternatives have been
identified for the region and are subject to modification in response
to comments received during the public scoping process.
Structural Alternatives: This set of alternatives will investigate
and describe possible harbor construction or improvement alternatives.
Types of structural solutions could include, but are not limited to,
rubble mound breakwaters, dredging, Search and Rescue infrastructure,
disaster response infrastructure, mooring basins, modified entrance
channels, navigation aids, etc.
Nonstructural Alternatives: Nonstructural alternatives could
include, but are not limited to, solutions like traffic management and
Port Authority establishment.
No Action Alternative: Under the ``no action'' alternative, the
Norton Sound Region would continue to encounter the haphazard
navigation scenario that presently exists in a challenging maritime
environment associated with the Bering Sea and other Arctic waters.
USACE would appreciate comments regarding whether there are
additional alternatives for the Environmental Impact Statement for
Arctic Deep Draft Ports Navigation Improvements Feasibility Study that
should be considered.
Identification of Environmental and Other Issues
USACE intends to address the following environmental issues when
assessing the potential environmental impacts of the alternatives in
this EIS. Additional issues may be identified as a result of the
scoping process. USACE invites comment from Federal agencies; state,
local, and tribal governments; and the general public on these and any
other issues that should be considered in the EIS:
Potential impacts on health from the existing usage of the
area by transiting and local vessels.
Potential impacts on health, both positive and negative,
as a result of project implementation.
Potential impacts to workers during the construction of
the facilities.
Potential impacts to surface water, tidelands and fauna
including turbidity from construction activities.
Potential impacts on air quality from emissions and from
noise during construction and operations.
Potential cumulative impacts of the past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions including impacts resulting from
activities foreign and domestic, multinational, Federal, state, and
local.
Potential impacts to historically significant properties,
if present, and on access to traditional use areas.
Potential impacts on local, regional, or national
resources from materials and utilities required for construction and
operation.
Potential impacts on ecological resources, including
threatened and endangered species and water quality.
Potential impacts on local employment, income, population,
housing, and public services from harbor construction and operations.
[[Page 29338]]
NEPA Process
The EIS for the proposed project will be prepared pursuant to the
NEPA of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), Council on Environmental Quality
NEPA Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and USACE's NEPA
Implementing Procedures (33 CFR parts 230 and 325). Following the
publication of this Notice of Intent, USACE will continue the scoping
process, prepare and distribute the draft EIS for public review, hold
public meetings to solicit public comment on the draft EIS, and publish
a final EIS. Not less than 30 days after the publication of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of Availability of the final
EIS, USACE may issue a Record of Decision (ROD) documenting its
decision concerning the proposed action.
EIS Schedule
The draft EIS is scheduled to be published no sooner than December
2013. A 45-day comment period on the draft EIS is planned, which will
include public meetings to receive comments. Availability of the draft
EIS, the dates of the public comment period, and information about
public meetings will be announced in the Federal Register and in the
local news media.
The final EIS for the Environmental Impact Statement for Arctic
Deep Draft Ports Navigation Improvements Feasibility Study is scheduled
for no sooner than November 2014. A ROD would be issued no sooner than
30 days after the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's notice of
availability of the final EIS is published in the Federal Register.
Gregory Schmidt,
Deputy Chief, Engineering Division.
[FR Doc. 2013-11850 Filed 5-17-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P