# Public Buildings Service; Proposed Port of Entry, Located North of Oroville, WA; Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-15220 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Uncategorized Document - **Published:** June 23, 1994 ## Text GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Public Buildings Service; Proposed Port of Entry, Located North of Oroville, WA; Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement ACTION: The General Services Administration (GSA) hereby gives notice it intends to prepare either an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) for the proposed port of entry located north of Oroville, Washington. The decision on whether to prepare an EIS would be made following the completion of scoping and the Environmental Assessment. The EA would evaluate the proposed project, expansion of the existing port of entry, the no-action alternative, and other reasonable alternatives that might be identified during the scoping process. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDRESSES: Scoping will be accomplished by correspondence and through a public meeting with interested persons, organizations, and Federal, state, and local agencies. Written comments on the scope of alternatives and potential impacts should be addressed to the GSA's EIS subconsultant, ABAM Consulting Engineers, at the following address: 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Federal Way, Washington 98003-6395, Attention: Carol Beck. DATES: Written comments should be sent by July 15, 1994. Comments and suggestions will also be accepted at a public scoping meeting from 5:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Monday June 27, 1994 at the Oroville Railroad Depot, 1210 Ironwood, Oroville, WA 98844. All comments received during the meeting will be made part of the administrative record for the EA and will be evaluated as part of the scoping process. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Carol Beck at ABAM Consulting Engineers, 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Federal Way, Washington 98003- 6395, (206) 241-2040 or Donna M. Meyer at General Services Administration, (206) 931-7675. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSA, assisted by our contractor will prepare an Environmental Assessment on a proposal to design and construct a new border station to be located approximately 5 miles north of the town of Oroville, Washington. The scoping process will determine the issues to be addressed in the EA, identify the potential adverse environmental issues related to the proposed expansion, and assist to determine whether an EIS should be prepared. Scoping will be conducted in a manner consistent with NEPA guidelines. If an EIS is required, GSA will serve as the lead agency pursuant to Section 1501.5(a) of the Council on Environmental Quality's Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500-1508). SCOPING: GSA invites interested individuals, organizations, affected tribes and Federal, state and local agencies and officials to participate in defining the reasonable alternatives to be evaluated in the EA and in identifying any adverse social, economical, or environmental issues related to the alternatives. Scoping comments can be made verbally or in writing (see DATES and ADDRESS sections above for location and time of meeting). During scoping, comments should focus on identifying specific impacts to be evaluated and suggesting alternatives or mitigation that minimize adverse impacts while achieving similar objectives. Comments may also identify issues which are not significant or which have been covered by prior environmental review. Scoping should be limited to commenting on alternatives and not indicating preferences. If an EIS is undertaken, there will be an opportunity to comment on impacts of the selected alternatives upon release of the draft document. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: A project information packet will be available at the public meeting or can be obtained by contacting the above referenced personnel. The packet will describe in more detail the proposed project, alternatives and the EA/EIS process. MAILING LIST: If you wish to be placed on the mailing list to receive further information for this proposal as the EA process develops, contact the above referenced personnel. PROJECT PURPOSE, HISTORICAL BACKGROUND, AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project purpose is the design and construction of a new Port of Entry at the U.S. and Canadian border near the town of Oroville, Washington. The new station would replace the existing station, which is overcrowded and functionally obsolete. The new facility would be constructed on 9.1 acres of land by utilizing the existing site of 3.7 acres and acquiring an additional 5.4 acres to the south. This additional acreage is necessary for maneuverability, reconfiguration and expansion. This facility is the only 24-hour multi-vehicle port in Eastern Washington located on a major arterial roadway, U.S. Route 97. It is also the only port in Eastern Washington designated as a commercial cargo center. The present configuration is unable to satisfactorily accommodate the volume of southbound traffic generated by Canadian tourists, day-trippers, shoppers, and commercial truck and bus traffic entering into the United States. At completion, the new port facility would provide 68,757 gross square feet of space, including canopy areas. The new facility would include a new main administration and inspection facility, a new multi- purpose building, and an animal inspection building. The primary inspection lanes would increase from two to four; secondary lanes from three to ten; primary commercial truck inspection lanes from zero to two; secondary commercial truck lanes from one to three; and the bus port bays from zero to two. A total of 124 outside parking spaces, seven truck and 117 visitor/staff would be provided for travelers, employees, seized vehicles, commercial vehicles, and government vehicles. ALTERNATIVES: The EA would consider an action alternative (Federal construction) and a no-action alternative. Due to the unique requirements for port of entry's, GSA has found it is impractical to consider leasing an existing office building to meet these needs. GSA is proposing to construct the facility at the site of the existing port of entry and to acquire a parcel of land lying directly to the south. The no-action alternative would continue the use of the overcrowded and obsolete station. PROBABLE EFFECTS: GSA will evaluate significant environmental, social, and economical impacts of the alternatives in the EA. Potential impacts include, but are not limited to, changes in geological characteristics, changes in drainage and absorption patterns, water quality, new sources of light or glare, loss of agricultural acreage, impacts to local residences and businesses, loss of open space, and changes in traffic and circulation patterns. The impacts will be evaluated both for the construction period and for the life of the project. Measures to mitigate any identifiable adverse impacts will be addressed. PROCEDURES: The EA will be prepared based on the scoping report. After its publication, GSA will make a decision whether an EIS will be required. If an EIS is to be prepared, a Draft EIS would be made available for public and agency review and comment, and a public hearing would be held. A Final EIS would be prepared following the closing of the comment period of the Draft. Dated: June 8, 1994. L. Jay Pearson, Regional Administration (10A). [FR Doc. 94-15220 Filed 6-22-94; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-23-M --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A94-15220. Public record. Not legal advice.