12254 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 

sensitive to and protective of 

California’s unique natural resources. 

Alternatives: The Palmdale-Los 

Angeles HST EIR/EIS will consider a No 

Action or No Project Alternative and 

HST Alternatives for the Palmdale to 

Los Angeles corridor. 

No Action Alternative: The take no 

action (No Project or No Build) 

alternative is defined to serve as the 

baseline for assessment of the HST 

Alternative. The No Build Alternative 

represents the region’s transportation 

system (highway, air, and conventional 

rail) as it existed in 2006, and as it 

would exist after completion of 

programs or projects currently planned 

for funding and implementation by 

2030. The No Build Alternative defines 

the existing and future intercity 

transportation system for the Palmdale 

to Los Angeles corridor based on 

programmed and funded improvements 

to the intercity transportation system 

through 2030, according to the 

following sources of information: State 

Transportation Improvement Program 

(STIP), Regional Transportation Plans 

(RTPs) for all modes of travel, airport 

plans, and intercity passenger rail plans. 

HST Alternative: The Authority 

proposes to construct, operate and 

maintain an electric-powered steelwheel-on-steel-rail HST system, over 

700-mile long (1,126-kilometer long), 

capable of speeds in excess of 200 miles 

per hour (mph) (320 kilometers per hour 

[km/h]) on dedicated, fully gradeseparated tracks, with state-of-the-art 

safety, signaling, and automated train 

control systems. The Palmdale to Los 

Angeles HST corridor that was selected 

by the Authority and FRA with the 

statewide program EIR/EIS follows SR–

58/Soledad Canyon from the City of 

Palmdale to Sylmar and then along the 

Metrolink Railroad line to Los Angeles 

Union Station. The corridor is relatively 

wide in the area that includes both the 

SR–14 and Union Pacific Railroad 

alignments between the Antelope Valley 

and Santa Clarita. Further engineering 

studies to be undertaken as a part of this 

EIR/EIS process will examine and refine 

alignments in the selected corridor, 

including sections from the Palmdale to 

Santa Clarita and from the Burbank 

Metrolink Station to Los Angeles Union 

Station. An alignment option that 

closely follows the SR–14 through 

Soledad Canyon will be considered as 

well as an alignment option through 

Soledad Canyon along the Santa Clara 

River. Alignments along San Fernando 

Road adjacent to Taylor Yard and along 

the existing Metrolink right-of-way 

around the Taylor Yard area will be 

considered. 

Station location options were selected 

by the Authority and FRA with the 

statewide program EIR/EIS considering 

travel time, train speed, cost, local 

access times, potential connections with 

other modes of transportation, ridership 

potential and the distribution of 

population and major destinations along 

the route, and local planning 

constraints/conditions. Alternative 

station sites at the selected general 

station locations will be identified and 

evaluated in this project level EIR/EIS. 

Station area development policies to 

encourage transit-friendly development 

near and around HST stations that 

would have the potential to promote 

higher density, mixed-use, pedestrianoriented development around the 

stations will be prepared in 

coordination with local and regional 

planning agencies. Potential station 

locations to be evaluated in the 

Palmdale-Los Angeles HST EIR/EIS 

include: City of Palmdale, Palmdale 

Transportation Center; City of Sylmar, 

Sylmar Metrolink station; and City of 

Burbank, Burbank Metrolink station. 

The HST station at Los Angeles Union 

Station is being evaluated in the project 

level Los Angeles-Orange HST EIR/EIS 

and will not be considered in the 

Palmdale-Los Angeles HST EIR/EIS 

process. In addition, potential sites for 

turnback/layover train storage facilities 

and a main HST repair and heavy 

maintenance facility will be evaluated 

in the Palmdale-Los Angeles HST EIR/ 

EIS. 

Probable Effects: The purpose of the 

EIR/EIS process is to explore in a public 

setting the effects of the proposed 

project on the physical, human, and 

natural environment. The FRA and the 

Authority will continue the tiered 

evaluation of all significant 

environmental, social, and economic 

impacts of the construction and 

operation of the HST system. Impact 

areas to be addressed include: 

transportation impacts; safety and 

security; land use, and zoning; 

secondary development; land 

acquisition, displacements, and 

relocations; cultural resource impacts, 

including impacts on historical and 

archaeological resources and parklands/ 

recreation areas; neighborhood 

compatibility and environmental 

justice; natural resource impacts 

including air quality, wetlands, water 

resources, noise, vibration, energy, 

wildlife and ecosystems, including 

endangered species. Measures to avoid, 

minimize, and mitigate all adverse 

impacts will be identified and 

evaluated. 

Scoping and Comments: FRA 

encourages broad participation in the 

EIS process during scoping and review 

of the resulting environmental 

documents. Comments and suggestions 

are invited from all interested agencies 

and the public at large to insure the full 

range of issues related to the proposed 

action and all reasonable alternatives 

are addressed and all significant issues 

are identified. In particular, FRA is 

interested in determining whether there 

are areas of environmental concern 

where there might be a potential for 

significant impacts identifiable at a 

project level. Public agencies with 

jurisdiction are requested to advise FRA 

and the Authority of the applicable 

permit and environmental review 

requirements of each agency, and the 

scope and content of the environmental 

information that is germane to the 

agency’s statutory responsibilities in 

connection with the proposed project. 

Public agencies are requested to advise 

FRA if they anticipate taking a major 

action in connection with the proposed 

project and if they wish to cooperate in 

the preparation of the project level EIR/ 

EIS. Public scoping meetings have been 

scheduled as an important component 

of the scoping process for both the State 

and Federal environmental review. The 

scoping meetings described in this 

Notice will also be advertised locally 

and included in additional public 

notification. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 9, 

2007. 

Mark E. Yachmetz, 

Associate Administrator for Railroad 

Development. 

[FR Doc. E7–4711 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Intent To Prepare an Environmental 

Impact Statement for High-Capacity 

Transit Improvements in the Leeward 

Corridor of Honolulu, HI 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration, 

DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

SUMMARY: The Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA) and the City and 

County of Honolulu, Department of 

Transportation Services (DTS) intend to 

prepare an EIS on a proposal by the City 

and County of Honolulu to implement 

a fixed-guideway transit system in the 

corridor between Kapolei and the 

University of Hawai1i at Ma ̄noa with a 

branch to Waikı ̄kı ̄. Alternatives 

proposed to be considered in the draft 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 12255 

EIS include No Build and two Fixed 

Guideway Transit alternatives. 

The EIS will be prepared to satisfy the 

requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) and its implementing 

regulations. The FTA and DTS request 

public and interagency input on the 

purpose and need to be addressed by 

the project, the alternatives to be 

considered in the EIS, and the 

environmental and community impacts 

to be evaluated. 

DATES: Scoping Comments Due Date: 

Written comments on the scope of the 

NEPA review, including the project’s 

purpose and need, the alternatives to be 

considered, and the related impacts to 

be assessed, should be sent to DTS by 

April 12, 2007. See ADDRESSES below. 

Scoping Meetings: Meetings to accept 

comments on the scope of the EIS will 

be held on March 28 and 29, 2007 at the 

locations given in ADDRESSES below. On 

March 28, 2007, the public scoping 

meeting will begin at 6:30 p.m. and 

continue until 9 p.m. or until all who 

wish to provide oral comments have 

been given the opportunity. The 

meeting on March 29, 2007 will begin 

at 5 p.m. and continue until 8 p.m. or 

until all who wish to provide oral 

comments have been given the 

opportunity. The locations are 

accessible to people with disabilities. A 

court reporter will record oral 

comments. Forms will be provided on 

which to submit written comments. 

Project staff will be available at the 

meeting to informally discuss the EIS 

scope and the proposed project. 

Governmental agencies will be invited 

to a separate scoping meeting to be held 

during business hours. Further project 

information will be available at the 

scoping meetings and may also be 

obtained by calling (808) 566–2299, by 

downloading from http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org, or by emailing info@honolulutransit.gov. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the EIS, including the project’s 

purpose and need, the alternatives to be 

considered, and the related impacts to 

be assessed, should be sent to the 

Department of Transportation Services, 

City and County of Honolulu, 650 South 

King Street, 3rd Floor, Honolulu, HI 

96813, Attention: Honolulu HighCapacity Transit Corridor Project, or by 

the Internet at http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org. 

The scoping meetings will be held at 

Kapolei Hale at 1000 Uluohia Street, 

Kapolei, HI 96707 on March 28, 2007 

from 6:30 p.m. to 9 p.m. and at 

McKinley High School at 1039 South 

King Street, Honolulu, HI 9814 on 

March 29, 2007 from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Donna Turchie, Federal Transit 

Administration, Region IX, 201 Mission 

Street, Room 1650, San Francisco, CA 

94105, Phone: (415) 744–2737, Fax: 

(415) 744–2726. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On December 7, 2005, FTA and DTS 

issued a notice of intent to prepare an 

Alternatives analysis followed by a 

separate EIS. The TS has now 

completed the planning alternatives 

analysis and, together with FTA, is 

proceeding with the NEPA review 

initiated through this scoping notice. 

The planning Alternatives analysis, 

conducted in accordance with 49 

United States Code (U.S.C.) 5309 as 

amended by the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU) 

(Pub. L. 109–59, 119 Stat. 1144), 

evaluated transit alternatives in the 

corridor from Kapolei to the University 

of Hawai‘i at Ma ̄noa and to Waikı ̄kı ̄. 

Four alternatives were studied, 

including No build, Transportation 

system Management, Bus operating in a 

Managed Lane, and Fixed Guideway 

Transit. Fixed Guideway Transit was 

selected as the Locally Preferred 

Alternative. The planning Alternatives 

Analysis is available on the project’s 

Web site at http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org. The Honolulu 

City Council has established a fixedguideway transit system connecting 

Kapolei and University of Hawai‘i at 

Ma ̄noa, with a branch to Waikı ̄kı ̄, as the 

locally preferred alternative. the O‘ahu 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

(OMPO) has included construction of 

rail transit system between Kapolei and 

the University of Hawai‘i at Ma ̄noa and 

Waikı ̄kı ̄ in the 2030 O‘ahu Regional 

Transportation Plan, April 2006. 

II. Scoping 

The FTA and DTS invite all interested 

individuals and organizations, and 

Federal, State, and local governmental 

agencies and Native Hawaiian 

organizations, to comment on the 

project’s purpose and need, the 

alternatives to be considered in the EIS, 

and the impacts to be evaluated. During 

the scoping process, comments on the 

proposed statement of purpose and need 

should address its completeness and 

adequacy. Comments on the alternatives 

should propose alternatives that would 

satisfy the purpose and need at less cost 

or with greater effectiveness or less 

environmental or community impact 

and were not previously studied and 

eliminated for good cause. At this time, 

comments should focus on the scope of 

the NEPA review and should not state 

a preference for a particular alternative. 

The best opportunity for that type of 

input will be after the release of the 

draft EIS. 

Following the scoping process, public 

outreach activities with interested 

parties or groups will continue 

throughout the duration of work on the 

EIS. The project Web site, http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org, will be 

updated periodically to reflect the status 

of the project. Additional Opportunities 

for public participation will be 

announced through mailings, notices, 

advertisements, and press releases. 

those wishing to be placed on the 

project mailing list may do so by 

registering on the Web site at http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org, or by calling 

(808) 566–2299. 

III. Description of Study Area 

The proposed project study area is the 

travel corridor between Kapolei and the 

University of Hawai‘i at Ma ̄noa (UH 

Ma ̄noa) and Waika ̄kı ̄. this narrow, linear 

corridor is confined by the Wai‘anae 

and Ko‘olau mountain ranges to the 

north (mauka direction) and the ocean 

to the south (makai direction). The 

corridor includes the majority of 

housing and employment on O‘ahu. The 

2000 census indicates that 876,200 

people live on O‘ahu. Of this number, 

over 552,000 people, or 63 percent, live 

within the corridor between Kapolei 

and Ma ̄noa/Waikı ̄kı ̄. This area is 

projected to absorb 69 percent of the 

population growth projected to occur on 

O‘ahu between 2000 and 2030, resulting 

in an expected corridor population of 

776,000 by 2030. Over the next twentythree years, the ‘Ewa/Kapolei area is 

projected to have the highest rate of 

housing and employment growth on 

O‘ahu. The ‘Ewa/Kapolei area is 

developing as a ‘‘second city’’ to 

complement downtown Honolulu. The 

housing and employment growth in 

‘Ewa is identified in the General Plan 

for the City and County of Honolulu. 

IV. Purpose and Need 

The purpose of the Honolulu HighCapacity Transit Corridor Project is to 

provide high-capacity, high-speed 

transit in the highly congested east-west 

transportation corridor between Kapolei 

and the University of Hawai‘i at Ma ̄noa, 

as specified in the 2030 O‘ahu Regional 

Transportation Plan (ORTP). The project 

is intended to provide faster, more 

reliable public transportation services in 

the corridor than those currently 

operating in mixed-flow traffic, to 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
12256 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 

provide basic mobility in areas of the 

corridor where people of limited income 

live, and to serve rapidly developing 

areas of the corridor. The project would 

also provide an alternative to provide 

automobile travel and improve transit 

linkages within the corridor. 

Implementation of the project, in 

conjunction with other improvements 

included in the ORTP, would moderate 

anticipated traffic congestion in the 

corridor. The project also supports the 

goals of the O‘ahu General Plan and the 

ORTP by serving areas designated for 

urban growth. 

The existing transportation in 

infrastructure in the corridor between 

Kapolei and UH Ma ̄noa is overburdened 

handling current levels of travel 

demand. Motorists and transit users 

experience substantial traffic congestion 

and delay at most times of the day, both 

on weekdays and on weekends. Average 

weekly peak-period speeds on the H–1 

Freeway are currently less than 20 mph 

in many places and will degrade even 

further by 2030. Transit vehicles are 

caught in the same congestion. Travelers 

on O‘ahu’s roadways currently 

experience 51,000 vehicle hours of 

delay, a measure of how much time is 

lost daily by travelers stuck in traffic, on 

a typical weekday. This measure of 

delay is projected to increase to more 

than 71,000 daily vehicle hours of delay 

by 2030, assuming implementation of 

all the planned improvements listed in 

the ORTP (except for a fixed guideway 

system). Without these improvements, 

ORTP indicates that daily vehicle-hours 

of delay could increase to as much as 

326,000 vehicle hours. 

Currently, motorists traveling from 

West O‘ahu to Downtown Honolulu 

experience highly congested traffic 

conditions during the a.m. peak period. 

By 2030, after including all of the 

planned roadway improvements in the 

ORTP, the level of congestion and travel 

time are projected to increase further. 

Average bus speeds in the corridor have 

been decreasing steadily as congestion 

has increased. ‘‘TheBus’’ travel times 

are projected to increase substantially 

through 2030. Within the urban core, 

most major arterial streets will 

experience increasing peak-period 

congestion, including Ala Moana 

Boulevard, Dillingham Boulevard, 

Kala ̄kaua Avenue, Kapi‘olani Boulevard, 

King Street, and Nimitz Highway. 

Expansion of the roadway system 

between Kapolei and UH Ma ̄noa is 

constrained by physical barriers and by 

dense urban neighborhoods that abut 

many existing roadways. Given the 

current and increasing levels of 

congestion, a need exists to offer an 

alternative way to travel within the 

corridor independent of current and 

projected highway congestion. 

As roadways become more congested, 

they become more susceptible to 

substantial delays caused by incidents, 

such as traffic accidents or heavy rain. 

Even a single driver unexpectedly 

braking can have a ripple effect delaying 

hundreds of cars. Because of the 

operating conditions in the study 

corridor, current travel times are not 

reliable for either transit or automobile 

trips. To get to their destination on time, 

travelers must allow extra time in their 

schedules to account for the uncertainty 

of travel time. This lack of predictability 

is inefficient and results in lost 

productivity. Because the bus system 

primarily operates in mixed-traffic, 

transit users experience the same level 

of travel time uncertainty as automobile 

users. A need exists to reduce transit 

travel times and provide a more reliable 

transit system. 

Consistent with the General Plan for 

the City and County of Honolulu, the 

highest population growth rates for the 

island are projected in the ‘Ewa 

Development Plan area (comprised of 

the ‘Ewa, Kapolei and Makakilo 

communities), which is expected to 

grow by 170 percent between 2000 and 

2030. This growth represents nearly 50 

percent of the total growth projected for 

the entire island. The more rural areas 

of Wai‘anae, Wahiawa ̄, North Shore, 

Waima ̄nalo, and East Honolulu will 

have lower population growth of 

between zero and 16 percent if 

infrastructure policies support the 

planned growth in the ‘Ewa 

Development Plan area. Kapolei, which 

is developing as a ‘‘second city’’ to 

Downtown Honolulu, is projected to 

grow by nearly 600 percent is 81,100 

people, the ‘Ewa neighborhhood by 100 

percent, and Makakilo by 125 percent 

between 2000 and 2030. Accessibility to 

the overall ‘Ewa Development Plan area 

is currently severely impaired by the 

congested roadway network, which will 

only get worse in the future. This area 

is less likely to develop as planned 

unless it is accessible to Downtown and 

other parts of O‘ahu; therefore, the ‘Ewa, 

Kapolei, and Makakilo area needs 

improved accessibility to support its 

future growth as planned. 

Many lower-income and minority 

workers live in the corridor outside of 

the urban core and commute to work in 

the Primary Urban Center Development 

Plan area. Many lower-income workers 

also rely on transit because of its 

affordability. In addition, daily parking 

costs in Downtown Honolulu are among 

the highest in the United States, further 

limiting this population’s access to 

Downtown. Improvements to transit 

capacity and reliability will serve all 

transportation system users, including 

moderate- and low-income populations. 

V. Alternatives 

The alternatives proposed for 

evaluation in the EIS were developed 

through a planning Alternatives 

Analysis that resulted in selection of a 

Fixed Guideway Transit Alternative as 

the locally preferred alternative (LPA). 

FTA and DTS propose to consider the 

following alternatives: 

• Future No Build Alternative, which 

would include existing transit and 

highway facilities and planned 

transportation projects (excluding the 

proposed project) anticipated to be 

operational by the year 2030. Bus 

service levels consistent with existing 

transit service policies is assumed for all 

areas within the project corridor under 

the Future No Build Alternative. 

• Fixed Guideway Alternatives, 

which would include the construction 

and operation of a fixed guideway 

transit system in the corridor between 

Kapolei and UH Ma ̄noa with a branch 

to Waikı ̄kı ̄. The draft EIS would 

consider five distinct transit 

technologies: Light trail transit, rapid 

rail transit, rubber-tired guided vehicles, 

a magnetic levitation system, and a 

monorail system. Comments on 

reducing the range of technologies 

under consideration are encouraged. 

The draft EIS also would consider two 

alignment alternatives. Both alignment 

alternatives would operate, for the most 

part, on a transit-guideway structure 

elevated above the roadway, with some 

sections at grade. Both alignment 

alternatives generally follow the route: 

North-South Road to Farrington 

Highway/Kamehameha Highway to Salt 

Lake Boulevard to Dillingham 

Boulevard to Nimitz Highway/ 

Halekauwila Street. Both alignment 

alternatives would have a future 

extension from downtown Honolulu to 

UH Ma ̄noa with a future branch to 

Waikı ̄kı ̄, and a future extension at the 

Waianae (western) end to Kalaeloa 

Boulevard in Kapolei. The second 

alignment alternative would have an 

additional loop created by a fork in the 

alignment at Aloha Stadium to serve 

Honolulu International Airport that 

rejoins the main alignment in the 

vicinity of the Middle Street Transit 

Center. The first construction phase for 

either of the Fixed Guideway 

Alternatives is currently expected to 

begin in the vicinity of the planned 

University of Hawai‘i West O‘ahu 

campus and extend to Ala Moana Center 

via Salt Lake Boulevard. The Build 

alternatives also include the 

construction of a vehicle maintenance 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 12257 

facility, transit stations and ancillary 

facilities such as park-and-ride lots and 

traction-power substations, and the 

modification and expansion of bus 

service to maximize overall efficiency of 

transit operation. 

Other reasonable alternatives 

suggested during the scoping process 

may be added if they were not 

previously evaluated and eliminated for 

good cause on the basis of the 

Alternatives Analysis and are consistent 

with the project’s purpose and need. 

The planning Alternatives Analysis is 

available for public and agency review 

on the project Web site at http:// 

www.honolulutransit.org. It is also 

available for inspection at the project 

office by calling (808) 566–2299 or by emailing info@honolulutransit.org. 

VI. Probable Effects 

The EIS will evaluate and fully 

disclose the environmental 

consequences of the construction and 

operation of a fixed guideway transit 

system on O‘ahu. The EIS will evaluate 

the impacts of all reasonable 

alternatives on land use, zoning, 

residential and business displacements, 

parklands, economic development, 

community disruptions, environmental 

justice, aesthetics, noise, wildlife, 

vegetation, endangered species, 

farmland, water quality, wetlands, 

waterways, floodplains, hazardous 

waste materials, and cultural, historic, 

and archaeological resources. To ensure 

that all significant issues related to this 

proposed action are identified and 

addressed, scoping comments and 

suggestions on more specific issues of 

environmental or community impact are 

invited from all interested parties. 

Comments and questions should be 

directed to the DTS as noted in the 

ADDRESSES section above. 

VII. FTA Procedures 

The EIS will be prepared in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA), as amended, and its 

implementing regulations by the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) (40 CFR parts 1500–1508) and by 

the FTA and Federal Highway 

Administration (‘‘Environmental Impact 

and Related Procedures’’ at 23 CFR part 

771). In accordance with FTA regulation 

and policy, the NEPA process will also 

address the requirements of other 

applicable environmental laws, 

regulations, and executive orders, 

including, but not limited to: Federal 

transit laws [49 U.S.C. 5301(e), 5323(b), 

and 5324(b)], Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act, 

Section 4(f) (‘‘Protection of Public 

Lands’’) of the U.S. Department of 

Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 303), 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species 

Act, and the Executive Orders on 

Environmental Justice, Floodplain 

Management, and Protection of 

Wetlands. 

Dated: March 12, 2007. 

Leslie T. Rogers, 

Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 07–1237 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Maritime Administration 

[USCG–2004–16877] 

Cabrillo Port Liquefied Natural Gas 

Deepwater Port License Application; 

Final Public Hearing and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement/Final 

Environmental Impact Report 

AGENCY: Maritime Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; notice of 

public hearing; request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Maritime Administration 

(MARAD) and the U.S. Coast Guard 

(USCG) announce the availability of the 

Final Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/ 

FEIR) for the Cabrillo Port Liquefied 

Natural Gas (LNG) Deepwater Port 

(DWP) license application. In addition, 

a public hearing will be held regarding 

the approval or denial of the license 

application. The proposed Cabrillo Port 

LNG DWP would be located offshore of 

Ventura County, California. Since the 

applicant has also filed a California 

State Lands Commission (CSLC) land 

lease application for subsea pipelines 

through California State waters to 

deliver natural gas to shore, the FEIS/ 

FEIR was prepared in accordance with 

a Memorandum of Agreement with the 

CSLC. The FEIS/FEIR meets 

requirements consistent with the 

Deepwater Port Act (DWPA) of 1974, as 

amended (33 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.); the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA Section 102[2][3]), as 

implemented by Council on 

Environmental Quality regulations (40 

Code of Federal Regulations 1500 to 

1508); and the California Environmental 

Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public 

Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.). 

The USCG and MARAD will receive 

public comments on the FEIS/FEIR and 

license application. Publication of this 

notice begins a 45 day comment period 

and provides information on how to 

participate in the process. 

DATES: The FEIS/FEIR will be available 

on March 16, 2007. Material submitted 

in response to the request for comments 

on the FEIS/FEIR and application must 

reach the Docket Management Facility 

by April 30, 2007 ending the 45 day 

public comment period. The final 

public hearing will be held in Oxnard, 

CA on April 4, 2007, from 5 p.m. to 8 

p.m. and will be preceded by an 

informational open house from 3 p.m. to 

4:30 p.m. The public hearing may end 

later than the stated time, depending on 

the number of persons wishing to speak. 

Federal and State agencies must 

submit comments, recommended 

conditions for licensing, or letters of no 

objection by May 21, 2007 (45 days after 

the final public hearing). In addition, by 

that same date, May 21, 2007, the 

Governor of California (the adjacent 

coastal state) may approve, disapprove, 

or notify MARAD of inconsistencies 

with State programs relating to 

environmental protection, land and 

water use, and coastal zone management 

for which MARAD may condition the 

license to make consistent with such 

State programs. 

MARAD must issue a record of 

decision (ROD) to approve, approve 

with conditions, or deny the DWP 

license application by July 3, 2007 (90 

days after the public hearing). 

ADDRESSES: The USCG and MARAD 

will conduct a public hearing in Oxnard 

to receive oral or written comments on 

April 4, 2007 from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. at 

the Performing Arts and Convention 

Center, Oxnard Room, 800 Hobson Way, 

Oxnard, California, 93030, telephone: 

(805) 486–2424. 

The public meeting space will be 

wheelchair-accessible. Individuals may 

request special accommodations for the 

public hearing, such as real time 

Spanish translation and/or for the 

hearing impaired. Contact Raymond 

Martin, USCG, at 202–372–1449 

Raymond.W.Martin@uscg.mil if special 

accommodations are required. Requests 

should be made as soon as possible but 

at least three (3) business days before 

the scheduled meeting. Include the 

name and telephone number of the 

contact person, the timelines for 

requesting accommodations, and a TDD 

number that can be used by individuals 

with hearing impairments. 

The FEIS/FEIR, the application, 

comments and associated 

documentation are available for viewing 

at the DOT’s Docket Management 

System Web site: http://dms.dot.gov 

under docket number 16877. The FEIS/ 

FEIR is also available at public libraries 

in Oxnard (Albert H. Soliz Library and 

Main Library, Oxnard Public Libraries), 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES