Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Flood Control Improvements to the Rio Grande Canalization Project in Vado, New Mexico; Notice of Availability, 75370-75371 [2013-29047]
Download as PDF
75370
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Notices
(Plethodon neomexicanus) within New
Mexico.
Permit TE–071287
Applicant: Bruce Christman,
Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Applicant requests a renewal to an
expired permit for research and
recovery purposes to conduct presence/
absence surveys and temporarily hold
for the purposes of collecting biological
data Jemez Mountain salamanders
(Plethodon neomexicanus) within New
Mexico.
Permit TE–19661B
Applicant: Tetra Tech, Inc., Portland,
Oregon.
Applicant requests an amendment to
a current permit for research and
recovery purposes to conduct presence/
absence surveys for Rio Grande silvery
minnow (Hybognathus amarus) within
the Middle Rio Grande River, New
Mexico.
Permit TE–116382
Applicant: Peoria Tribe of Indians of
Oklahoma, Miami, Oklahoma.
Applicant requests an amendment to
a current permit for research and
recovery purposes to hold and
propagate Neosho mucket (Lampsilis
rafinesqueana) and release into the wild
in Oklahoma.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Permit TE–833851
Applicant: City of Austin Watershed
Protection Department, Austin, Texas.
Applicant requests an amendment to
a current permit for research and
recovery purposes to conduct presence/
absence surveys; abundance surveys
using mark/recapture; hormone
sampling; collection of up to 3
individuals as voucher specimens from
new locations; and collection of tail
clips for genetic sampling of the Austin
blind salamander (Eurycea
waterlooensis) within Texas.
Permit TE–13850A
Applicant: Jarrod Edens, Edmond,
Oklahoma.
Applicant requests a renewal to a
current permit for research and recovery
purposes to conduct presence/absence
surveys for American burying beetle
(Nicrophorus americanus) within
Oklahoma, Texas, and Arkansas.
Permit TE–819558
Applicant: U.S.D.A. Forest Service,
National Forests and Grasslands in
Texas, Lufkin, Texas.
Applicant requests a renewal to a
current permit for research and recovery
purposes to conduct presence/absence
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
surveys of interior least tern (Sterna
antillarum) and American burying
beetle (Nicrophorus americanus) and
the following activities for red-cockaded
woodpecker (Picoides borealis) in
Texas: presence/absence surveys; roost
searches; tree activity status checks;
handling of juvenile and chicks;
banding of adults; banding of nestlings;
translocating; trapping; installing
artificial cavities, and cavity exams.
Permit TE–676811
Applicant: U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service-Region 2, Albuquerque, New
Mexico.
Applicant requests an amendment to
a current permit for research and
recovery purposes to conduct presence/
absence surveys and recovery the
following species within New Mexico,
Oklahoma, and Texas:
• Austin blind salamander (Eurycea
waterlooensis)
• Chupadera springsnail (Pyrgulopsis
chupadarae)
• Jemez Mountains salamander
(Plethodon neomexicanus)
• Neosho mucket (Lampsilis
Rafinesqueana)
Permit TE–819451
Applicant: Travis County
Transportation and Natural
Resources, Austin, Texas.
Applicant requests a renewal to a
current permit for research and recovery
purposes to conduct presence/absence
surveys of the following species in
Texas:
• Bee Creek Cave harvestman (Texella
reddelli)
• Black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla)
• Bone Cave harvestman (Texella
reyesi)
• Braken Bat Cave meshweaver
(Cicurina venii)
• Coffin Cave mold beetle (Batrisodes
texanus)
• Cokendolpher Cave harvestman
(Texella cokendolpheri)
• Golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica
chrysoparia)
• Government Canyon Bat Cave
meshweaver (Cicurina vespera)
• Government Canyon Bat Cave spider
(Neoleptoneta microps)
• Ground beetle (Rhadine exilis)
• Ground beetle (Rhadine infernalis)
• Helotes mold beetle (Batrisodes
venyivi)
• Kretschmarr Cave mold beetle
(Texamaurops reddelli)
• Madla Cave meshweaver (Cicurina
madla)
• Robber Baron Cave meshweaver
(Cicurina baronia)
• Tooth Cave ground beetle (Rhadine
persephone)
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Tooth Cave pseudoscorpion
(Tartarocreagris texana)
• Tooth Cave spider (Neoleptoneta
(=Leptoneta) myopica)
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA)
In compliance with NEPA (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), we have made an initial
determination that the proposed
activities in these permits are
categorically excluded from the
requirement to prepare an
environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement (516
DM 6 Appendix 1, 1.4C(1)).
Public Availability of Comments
All comments and materials we
receive in response to this request will
be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the address listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Authority
We provide this notice under section
10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
Dated: November 22, 2013.
Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Acting Regional Director, Southwest Region.
[FR Doc. 2013–29460 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND
WATER COMMISSION, UNITED
STATES AND MEXICO
Draft Supplemental Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for Flood Control
Improvements to the Rio Grande
Canalization Project in Vado, New
Mexico; Notice of Availability
United States Section,
International Boundary and Water
Commission (USIBWC), United States
and Mexico.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft
Supplemental Environmental
Assessment (SEA) and Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI).
AGENCY:
Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c)
of the National Environmental Policy
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 11, 2013 / Notices
Act of 1969; the Council on
Environmental Quality Final
Regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500 through
1508); and the USIBWC’s Operational
Procedures for Implementing Section
102 of NEPA, published in the Federal
Register September 2, 1981, (46 FR
44083); the USIBWC hereby gives notice
that the Final Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for Flood Control
Improvements to the Rio Grande
Canalization Project in Vado, New
Mexico are available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gilbert Anaya, Environmental
Management Division; United States
Section, International Boundary and
Water Commission; 4171 N. Mesa, C–
100; El Paso, Texas 79902. Telephone:
(915) 832–4703, email: gilbertanaya@
ibwc.state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Action
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The USIBWC is considering relocating
the Rio Grande river channel in the
Canalization Project Levee System in a
1.08 mile stretch in Vado, New Mexico
and create new levees where no flood
control measures exist in an effort to
meet current flood control requirements.
The Preferred Alternative would
relocate the river channel approximately
100 feet west due to the river channel
moving east against the Burlington
Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. The
preferred alternative would then create
a new levee that would tie into existing
levee structures to the north and south
of the project area. These improvements
will be subject to availability of funds.
The Supplemental Environmental
Assessment assesses potential
environmental impacts of the No Action
Alternative and the Preferred
Alternative. Two additional alternatives
were considered but were not evaluated
as they were determined to be more
costly, more difficult to achieve, less
reliable, and more difficult to maintain.
Potential impacts on natural, cultural,
and other resources were evaluated. A
Finding of No Significant Impact was
issued for the Preferred Alternative
based on a review of the facts and
analyses contained in the
Environmental Assessment when taking
the proposed mitigation into account.
Alternatives Considered
A No Action Alternative was
evaluated for the flood control
improvements to the Rio Grande
Canalization Project Levee System. This
alternative would retain the existing
configuration of the system, and the
level of protection currently associated
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 232001
with this system. Under severe storm
events, current containment capacity
may be insufficient to fully control Rio
Grande flooding, with risks to personal
safety and potential property damage, as
well as risks to the railroad system.
Design alternatives were conducted
and evaluated in the final design
memorandum entitled ‘‘Rehabilitation
Improvements for the Vado East Levee,
˜
Dona Ana County, New Mexico,’’ dated
July 29, 2011. The final design
memorandum evaluated three
alternatives as described below.
Preferred Alternative. The Preferred
Alternative would allow the levees to
meet the design criteria to contain flood
flows and to comply with FEMA
specifications for the levees in the Rio
Grande Canalization Project Levee
System. This would be accomplished by
creating a flood containment levee 1.08
miles in length that would continue
from the current levee system to the
north and south of the project area. Fill
material, obtained from commercial
sources would be used to create a levee
to meet the 3 foot freeboard criterion
established by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). In order
to create the levee in this area, the river
channel would have to be relocated 100
feet to the west and the floodplain
would have to be re-established on the
eastern side of the river.
Flood Wall Alternative. This
alternative would construct a flood wall
that would tie into the existing levee
system to the north and south of the
project. The flood wall would require
dredging the river channel along the
section that is currently against the
railroad easement and construction of a
concrete or metal wall that would
extend 888 feet along the river and
existing flood plain to the current
levees. The wall would be 8 feet tall
above the flood plain and require
pilings to be driven 40 feet in the
ground.
Sheet Pile Wall Alternative. This
alternative would construct a sheet pile
wall instead of the flood wall. This wall
would follow the same requirements but
would consist of interlocked metal
sheets driven into the ground instead of
a concrete wall. Therefore, the pilings
would also have to be driven 40 feet
into the ground but would instead of a
few like in the flood wall; all of the
pilings across the entire length would
have to be driven down to bedrock.
Availability
Single hard copies of the Final
Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact may be
obtained by request at the above
address. Electronic copies may also be
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
75371
obtained from the USIBWC Web page:
www.ibwc.gov/Organization/
Environmental/EIS_EA_Public_
Comment.html.
Dated: November 27, 2013.
Luisa Alvarez,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2013–29047 Filed 12–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7010–01–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–1206 (Final)]
Diffusion-Annealed, Nickel-Plated FlatRolled Steel Products From Japan;
Scheduling of the Final Phase of an
Antidumping Investigation
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Commission hereby gives
notice of the scheduling of the final
phase of antidumping investigation No.
731–TA–1206 (Final) under section
735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1673d(b)) (the Act) to determine
whether an industry in the United
States is materially injured or
threatened with material injury, or the
establishment of an industry in the
United States is materially retarded, by
reason of less-than-fair-value imports
from Japan of diffusion-annealed,
nickel-plated flat-rolled steel products,
provided for primarily in subheadings
7210.90.60 and 7212.50.00 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States.1
For further information concerning
the conduct of this phase of the
investigation, hearing procedures, and
rules of general application, consult the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, part 201, subparts A through
E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207,
subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207).
DATES: Effective Date: November 19,
2013.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nathanael Comly (202–205–3174),
Office of Investigations, U.S.
1 For purposes of this investigation, the
Department of Commerce has defined the subject
merchandise as flat-rolled, cold reduced steel
products, regardless of chemistry; whether or not in
coils; either plated or coated with nickel or nickelbased alloys and subsequently annealed (i.e.,
‘‘diffusion-annealed’’); whether or not painted,
varnished or coated with plastics or other metallic
or nonmetallic substances; and less than or equal
to 2.0 mm in nominal thickness. For purposes of
this investigation, ‘‘nickel-based alloys’’ include all
nickel alloys with other metals in which nickel
accounts for at least 80 percent of the alloy by
volume. (78 FR 69371, November 19, 2013)
E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM
11DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75370-75371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29047]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO
Draft Supplemental Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for Flood Control Improvements to the Rio Grande
Canalization Project in Vado, New Mexico; Notice of Availability
AGENCY: United States Section, International Boundary and Water
Commission (USIBWC), United States and Mexico.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of Draft Supplemental Environmental
Assessment (SEA) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy
[[Page 75371]]
Act of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Final Regulations (40
CFR Parts 1500 through 1508); and the USIBWC's Operational Procedures
for Implementing Section 102 of NEPA, published in the Federal Register
September 2, 1981, (46 FR 44083); the USIBWC hereby gives notice that
the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
for Flood Control Improvements to the Rio Grande Canalization Project
in Vado, New Mexico are available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gilbert Anaya, Environmental
Management Division; United States Section, International Boundary and
Water Commission; 4171 N. Mesa, C-100; El Paso, Texas 79902. Telephone:
(915) 832-4703, email: gilbertanaya@ibwc.state.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Proposed Action
The USIBWC is considering relocating the Rio Grande river channel
in the Canalization Project Levee System in a 1.08 mile stretch in
Vado, New Mexico and create new levees where no flood control measures
exist in an effort to meet current flood control requirements. The
Preferred Alternative would relocate the river channel approximately
100 feet west due to the river channel moving east against the
Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad. The preferred alternative
would then create a new levee that would tie into existing levee
structures to the north and south of the project area. These
improvements will be subject to availability of funds.
The Supplemental Environmental Assessment assesses potential
environmental impacts of the No Action Alternative and the Preferred
Alternative. Two additional alternatives were considered but were not
evaluated as they were determined to be more costly, more difficult to
achieve, less reliable, and more difficult to maintain. Potential
impacts on natural, cultural, and other resources were evaluated. A
Finding of No Significant Impact was issued for the Preferred
Alternative based on a review of the facts and analyses contained in
the Environmental Assessment when taking the proposed mitigation into
account.
Alternatives Considered
A No Action Alternative was evaluated for the flood control
improvements to the Rio Grande Canalization Project Levee System. This
alternative would retain the existing configuration of the system, and
the level of protection currently associated with this system. Under
severe storm events, current containment capacity may be insufficient
to fully control Rio Grande flooding, with risks to personal safety and
potential property damage, as well as risks to the railroad system.
Design alternatives were conducted and evaluated in the final
design memorandum entitled ``Rehabilitation Improvements for the Vado
East Levee, Do[ntilde]a Ana County, New Mexico,'' dated July 29, 2011.
The final design memorandum evaluated three alternatives as described
below.
Preferred Alternative. The Preferred Alternative would allow the
levees to meet the design criteria to contain flood flows and to comply
with FEMA specifications for the levees in the Rio Grande Canalization
Project Levee System. This would be accomplished by creating a flood
containment levee 1.08 miles in length that would continue from the
current levee system to the north and south of the project area. Fill
material, obtained from commercial sources would be used to create a
levee to meet the 3 foot freeboard criterion established by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In order to create the levee in
this area, the river channel would have to be relocated 100 feet to the
west and the floodplain would have to be re-established on the eastern
side of the river.
Flood Wall Alternative. This alternative would construct a flood
wall that would tie into the existing levee system to the north and
south of the project. The flood wall would require dredging the river
channel along the section that is currently against the railroad
easement and construction of a concrete or metal wall that would extend
888 feet along the river and existing flood plain to the current
levees. The wall would be 8 feet tall above the flood plain and require
pilings to be driven 40 feet in the ground.
Sheet Pile Wall Alternative. This alternative would construct a
sheet pile wall instead of the flood wall. This wall would follow the
same requirements but would consist of interlocked metal sheets driven
into the ground instead of a concrete wall. Therefore, the pilings
would also have to be driven 40 feet into the ground but would instead
of a few like in the flood wall; all of the pilings across the entire
length would have to be driven down to bedrock.
Availability
Single hard copies of the Final Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact may be obtained by request at the
above address. Electronic copies may also be obtained from the USIBWC
Web page: www.ibwc.gov/Organization/Environmental/EIS_EA_Public_Comment.html.
Dated: November 27, 2013.
Luisa Alvarez,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2013-29047 Filed 12-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7010-01-P