Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices 36887

4. It is anticipated that transition to

DTOD will have no significant impact

upon passenger carriers since rates are

not obtained or paid on a mileage basis,

but rather on a per seat or per trip basis.

While per seat cost and trip costs must

consider distance, offerors will be free

to establish their costs based on the

distance calculation methods of their

choice.

5. The DTOD/PC*MILER products

will calculate both ‘‘shortest’’ and

‘‘practical’’ mileage. It will contain

Standford Point Location Codes,

military locations and other worldwide

locations required by DoD. Updates and

version control DTOD and PC*MILER

will be consistent with industry

practices. Carriers and/or other parties

who choose to use PC*MILER will have

opportunities to provide feedback to

ALK Associates, Inc., the provider of

DTOD software, regarding routings,

database suggestions such as distance

differences, road preference suggestions,

road re-classifications, new locations,

etc.

6. Interested parties are invited to

provide comments concerning the use of

the DTOD to the address provided

above. Comments will be accepted for a

period of 60 days from the publication

date of this notice.

7. Regulatory Flexibility Act. This

change is related to public contracts and

is designed to standardize distance

calculation for line-haul transportation.

This change is not considered rule

making within the meaning of the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–

612.

8. Paperwork Reduction Act. The

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.

3051 et seq., does not apply because no

information collection requirement or

recordskeeping responsibilities are

imposed on offerors, contractors, or

members of the public.

Francis A. Galluzzo,

ADCSOPS Transportation Services.

[FR Doc. 98–18021 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of

Engineers

Termination of Preparation of an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

for the Red River Chloride Control

Project (RRCCP), Texas and Oklahoma

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

termination of work toward preparation

of an EIS for the RRCCP. A Draft

Supplement to the Final EIS for the

project was filed with the

Environmental Protection Agency and

published in the Federal Register on

May 5, 1995 (EIS No. 950177). The final

Supplement was scheduled for release

on January 8, 1996, but was delayed

until May 13, 1996, and again until

August 1996 so that additional

information received during the review

process could be considered and

incorporated into the document.

As a result of public review

comments, opposition from natural

resource agencies, and Washington level

review, it has been determined that the

final Supplement will not be released

and filed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions or comments concerning the

proposed action should be addressed to

Mr. David L. Combs, Chief,

Environmental Analysis and

Compliance Branch, Tulsa District, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 61,

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74121, telephone 918–

669–7188.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: During the

National Environmental Policy Act

process for the Supplement to the Final

Environmental Impact Statement

(SFEIS), several issues were identified

as concerns by the public and

commenting natural resource agencies.

The major concerns were categorized

into the following components: (1)

hydrological, biological, and water

quality issues concerning fish, aquatic

invertebrates, algae/biofilm, aquatic

macrophytes, wetland/riparian

ecosystem components, along with

continued function and integrity of the

upper Red River ecosystem; (2) the Lake

Texoma component, including chloride/

turbidity relationships, chloride/fish

reproduction issues, chloride/plankton

community issues, chloride/nutrient

dynamics issues, and impacts on lake

sport fisheries, aesthetics, and

recreational values; (3) a selenium

component addressing selenium

concentrations and impacts on biota; (4)

changes in land use at the Area VI brine

storage reservoir; (5) impacts on the

potential to designate the upper Red

River as a wild and scenic river; (6)

man-made brines and associated

reduction; (7) Section 401 water quality

issues; (8) mitigation as it relates to

indirect habitat losses resulting from

irrigated cropland and direct impacts

from construction of project

components; (9) impacts on the

commercial bait minnow fishery of the

upper Red River; (10) Federally-listed

threatened and endangered species; and

(11) unquantifiable/undefined impacts.

In an attempt to resolve

environmental concerns, the District

participated in an Environmental Issue

Resolution Process (EIRP) along with

the project sponsor and the natural

resource agencies. A steering committee

was developed to oversee technical

workgroups formed to address the major

areas of concern which were identified

as selenium accumulation, Lake Texoma

productivity, and the upper Red River

ecosystem. The ultimate goal was to

develop an Environmental Operational

Plan (EOP) acceptable to all agencies for

inclusion into the SFEIS. The overall

objective of the EOP was to protect

against unacceptable environmental

changes with the project.

Despite the efforts of all the agencies

through the EIRP, areas of controversy

regarding the potential for and/or the

relative significance of impacts of the

project remain for nearly every issue

addressed during the process.

Controversy remains regarding: (1) the

amount of chloride loads being

contributed by man-made sources; (2)

the levels of significance of impacts to

biota, specifically fishes, of the upper

Red River due to reduction of chlorides

and flow; (3) the use of surface storage

impoundments and the potential for

selenium accumulation; (4) the

significance of chloride impact on lake

turbidity in Lake Texoma and potential

impacts on the lake fishery, and (5) the

amount of mitigation lands required to

mitigate project impacts.

Natural resource agency concerns for

potential impacts associated with the

RRCCP are warranted. However, the

degree and severity of impacts are

speculative and difficult to ascertain as

many potential impacts are indirect and

may or may not occur over the life of the

project. Also, many of the impacts to the

upper Red River ecosystem and Lake

Texoma are difficult to address because

of the complexity of these issues.

Furthermore, many impacts may not be

quantifiable prior to completion of

extensive baseline data collection and

long-term project monitoring. Adding to

this difficulty is the fact that few longterm trend analyses have been

conducted within the upper Red River

Basin.

During the EIRP process, the District

funded additional studies to more

adequately address natural resource

agency concerns and the severity of

impacts. However, most study findings

were unable to definitively quantify the

magnitude of impacts, if any,

attributable to the project.

Consequently, there are still several

unresolved issues that may only be

resolved following long-term collection
36888 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 / Notices

of baseline data, construction of the

project, and long-term monitoring.

The project was recoordinated with

the resource agencies in accordance

with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination

Act (FWCA), and the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a Draft

FWCA Report for the project dated

August 1994. The Service’s position is,

‘‘The project not proceed as formulated

due to unmitigable impacts to important

fish and wildlife resources. Other

alternatives, such as desalinization,

effluent reclamation, and water

blending, should be evaluated and

incorporated into a limited project that

meets the water requirements of the

basin. Control of chlorides at Areas IV,

XIII, and XIV should not be pursued as

proposed due to their anticipated

significant contribution to impacts to:

(1) the Red River aquatic community; (2)

the Lake Texoma sport fishery; (3) the

Sandy Sanders Wildlife Management

Area; (4) Federally-listed species; and

(5) migratory birds and other resources

from selenium contamination at the

proposed brine storage sites. In July

1996, the USFWS furnished an Interim

Final Supplemental FWCA report for

the project. The Service’s position with

respect to the project remains

unchanged.

Timothy L. Sanford,

Colonel, U.S. Army District Engineer.

[FR Doc. 98–18020 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–39–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of

Engineers

Intent To Prepare a Draft

Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS) for the South River, Raritan

River Basin, Combined Flood Control

and Environmental Restoration

Project, Middlesex County, New Jersey

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

DoD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The New York District of the

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is

preparing a Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS) for proposed measures

to provide flood control protection and

environmental restoration in the South

River, Raritan River Basin, New Jersey.

For this Notice of Intent, the Corps is

considering protection measures to

reduce damages caused by flooding and

coastal storms. The EIS will be prepared

according to the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers procedures for implementing

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969, as amended, (NEPA), 42 U.S.C.

4332(2)(C), and consistent with the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineer’s policy to

facilitate public understanding and

scrutiny of agency proposals. This

notice of intent is published as required

by the President’s Council on

Environmental Quality regulations

implementing the provisions of NEPA,

40 CFR Parts 1500–1508.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions regarding the action can be

addressed to Mark H. Burlas, Project

Environmental Manager, phone (212)

264–4663, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, New York District, Planning

Division, 26 Federal Plaza New York,

New York 10278–0090.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Authorization

This study is authorized by a U.S.

House of Representatives resolution

dated May 13, 1993. The reconnaissance

report, completed in May 1995,

identified a potential plan of

improvement that consists of two

levees, each approximately 10,000 feet

long along opposite banks of the South

River. The levees would protect the

communities of South River and

Sayerville from a 100-year flood.

For environmental restoration, we

identified a plan of improvement to

restore the quality of the salt marsh near

the Washington Canal. The plan would

involve the replacement of low quality

vegetation in 250 acres of wetlands to

restore an important habitat.

2. Location of the Proposed Action

This study area is located within the

lower Raritan River Basin in Middlesex

County, New Jersey. The South River is

the first major tributary of the Raritan

River, located approximately 8.3 miles

upstream of the Raritan River’s mouth at

the Raritan Bay.

The South River is formed by the

confluence of Matchaponix and

Manalapan Brooks, just above Duhernal

Lake, and flows northward from

Duhernal Lake Dam for a distance of

approximately seven miles, at which

point it splits into the old South River

and the Washington Canal. It flows

through the Townships of East

Brunswick and Old Bridge, and the

Boroughs of South River and Sayerville.

3. Reasonable Alternative Actions

In addition to the ‘‘No Action’’

alternative, the flood control component

of the feasibility study will evaluate

alternatives such as buy-outs, storm

gates and flood walls to avoid and

minimize impacts to coastal wetlands,

as well as various levee layouts and

heights. The environmental restoration

component will analyze alternatives to

restore degraded coastal marshes and

tidal ecosystems.

4. Significant Issues Requiring In-Depth

Analysis

1. Coastal Wetlands Impacts; 2.

Impacts to Aquatic Resources; 3.

Archaeological and Cultural Resources

Impacts; 4. Hydrology Impacts; 5.

Economic Impacts.

5. Environmental Review and

Consultation

Review will be conducted as outlined

in the Council on Environmental

Quality regulations dated November 29,

1983 (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508) and U.S.

Army Corps of Engineer regulation ER

200–2–2 dated March 4, 1988.

6. Public Scoping Meeting

A public scoping meeting is

tentatively scheduled for July 16, 1998,

at the South River Public Library, (55

Appleby Avenue, South River, New

Jersey 08816) from 5:30 p.m. to 8:00

p.m.

7. Estimated Date of DEIS Availability

February 2000.

Gregory D. Showalter,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–18027 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–06–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army, Corps of

Engineers

Intent To Prepare a Draft

Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS) for the Raritan Bay and Sandy

Hook Bay, Combined Flood Control

and Shore Protection Project, Union

Beach, Monmouth County, New Jersey

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

DoD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: The New York District of the

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is

preparing a Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS) for proposed measures

to provide flood control and storm

damage protection in Union Beach, New

Jersey. For this Notice of Intent, the

Corps is considering protection

measures to reduce damages caused by

flooding and coastal storms. The EIS

will be prepared according to the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers procedures for

implementing the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as

amended, (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C),

and consistent with the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineer’s policy to facilitate