Office of Mexican Affairs; Notice of Issuance of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) With Regard to the Issuance of a Presidential Permit for the Anzalduas International Crossing, McAllen, Texas

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice No. 3109]

Office of Mexican Affairs; Notice of Issuance of a Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI) With Regard to the Issuance of a

Presidential Permit for the Anzalduas International Crossing, McAllen,

Texas

AGENCY: Department of State.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Department of State has issued

a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the human environment for

the Anzalduas International Crossing project sponsored by the Cities of

McAllen, Hidalgo and Mission, Texas. An initial draft of the

environmental assessment of the proposed Anzalduas International

Crossing was prepared by Halff Associates, Inc.; Gutierrez, Smouse,

Wilmut and Associates, Inc.; together with Dr. Michael E. Tewes, Mr.

Joe Idecker and Dr. John Keller for the sponsors, the Cities of

McAllen, Hidalgo and Mission, Texas.

Both the draft Environmental Assessment and the draft Final

Environmental Assessment of the Department of State (Draft Final EA)

have been reviewed by numerous federal and state agencies. Each such

``cooperating agency'' has approved or accepted the draft Final EA,

provided, in certain cases, that mitigation recommendations are

followed. These cooperating agencies are:

U.S. Government: The Immigration and Naturalization Service, U.S.

Customs Service, Department of Agriculture, General Services

Administration, United States Section of the International Boundary and

Water Commission, Department of Transportation, Department of the

Interior, U.S. Coast Guard, Environmental Protection Agency, Food and

Drug Administration, Federal Emergency Management Administration,

Department of Defense and Department of Commerce.

State of Texas: Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission,

Department of Public Safety, General Land Office, Texas Historical

Commission, Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Parks and

Wildlife Department, Lower Rio Grande Valley Development Council and

Office of the Secretary of State.

Based upon the Department's independent review of the Draft EA, the

Final EA, comments received during their preparation and comments

received by the Department from federal and state agencies including

measures which are proposed to be taken to prevent or mitigate

potentially adverse environmental impacts which the Sponsors intend to

take, the Department has concluded that issuance of a Presidential

Permit authorizing construction of the proposed Anzalduas International

Crossing, as proposed to be constructed in Road Alternative # 3 as set

forth in the Final Environmental Assessment, would not have a

significant impact on the quality of the human environment within the

United States. Accordingly, a finding of no significant impact is

adopted and an EIS will not be prepared.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Presidential Permit may be obtained from Mr.

David E. Randolph, Coordinator, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs, Office of

Mexican Affairs, Room 4258, Department of State, Washington, D.C.

20520, telephone (202) 647-8529. A copy of the Department's Final

Environmental Assessment is available for inspection in Room 4258 of

the Department of State during normal business hours.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action is to issue a

Presidential Permit to the Cities of McAllen, Hidalgo and Mission,

Texas, for the construction, operation and maintenance of an

international vehicular and pedestrian bridge, its approaches and

facilities at the international boundary between the United States and

Mexico, southwest of McAllen, Texas, and adjacent to Reynosa,

Tamaulipas, Mexico (the proposed ``Anzalduas International Crossing'').

Factors Considered

The Department in this case considered four roadway crossing

construction alternatives. It should be noted that each alternative

contemplates initial construction of a four-lane road with ultimate

build-out to eight lanes. The draft Final Environmental Assessment was

prepared with this information in mind. The alternatives are described

in detail in the draft Final Environmental Assessment and in summary

fashion as follows:

Road Alternative #1: This alternative comprises building a four-

lane access road and bridge to a Border Station, assumed to be

constructed on fill, immediately south of the Banker Floodway. Beyond

the Border Station, a four-lane approach road at grade would be built

to the main channel of the Rio Grande, and a four-lane international

bridge elevated over the main channel.

Road Alternative #2: This alternative comprises a four-lane access

road and bridge to an identical Border Station location for Road

Alternative # 1. South of the Border Station, the road to the Rio

Grande is entirely on structure using the four-lane international

bridge section throughout. The length of this proposed bridge structure

is approximately 4,800 feet.

Road Alternative #3: This alternative comprises a four-lane access

road to a Border Station located approximately 1,000 feet north of the

Banker Floodway. South of the Border Station, the roadway is to be

constructed with four roadway lanes and a sidewalk on one side for the

entire segment south to the Rio Grande. This segment is to be comprised

of 2,200 feet of bridge across the Old Military Highway and the Banker

Floodway (identical to the international bridge section), 6,100 feet of

approach road at grade south of the Floodway and 700 feet of

international bridge to the center of the Rio Grande main channel.

Road Alternative #4: This alternative is identical to Road

Alternative # 3, except that with respect to this alternative, the road

remains on structure from the south edge of the Border Station all the

way to the Rio Grande. The road segment south of the Border Station is

therefore 9,000 feet of international bridge.

Other Alternatives: Two other alternative options are addressed in

the Final Environmental Assessment: (a) a no-action/no-build option;

and (b) a mass transit option. The Department has considered each of

these options as an alternative to construction of the Anzalduas

International Crossing and has determined that neither is feasible.

In considering option (a), the no-action/no-build alternative, and

option (b), the option of Sponsors providing expanded public

transportation services between the cities of McAllen, Texas, and

Reynosa, Mexico, the Department notes the continuing increase in

traffic, including commercial truck traffic, on existing bridges in the

general vicinity of the proposed Anzalduas International Crossing.

The Department further notes the significant and growing need for

effective transportation of people, goods, and services between the

United States and Mexico. (Between 1994 and 1998, the value of U.S.

trade with Mexico nearly doubled, from $100.3 billion to $173.7

billion.) In the longer term, trade with Mexico is likely to continue

to increase as a result of the increase in ``maquiladoras'' located in

the vicinity of the sponsoring cities across the international boundary

in Mexico. Reynosa is now one of the most successful cities along the

northern Mexico frontier in attracting new maquiladora plants.

[[Page 44076]]

No action would likely result in saturation of the existing

Hidalgo-Reynosa International Bridge causing worse delays and gradual

deterioration of trade in the area. The Hidalgo-Reynosa International

Bridge, heavily congested during many hours of each day, ranks among

the top of all Texas border crossings with more than 40,000 vehicular

crossings (two-way) on an average day. The preferred regional action is

to move through traffic and commercial traffic away from the center of

Reynosa, out to the Pharr International Bridge on the east and to the

Anzalduas International Crossing on the west. The no-action/no-build

alternative would force a significant portion of the cross-border trips

to travel through the crowded downtown Reynosa street system or else

divert up to ten miles to cross at the Pharr International Bridge. The

diversion to Pharr could result in extra travel on the order of 30

million vehicle miles per year, with gradually worsening effects

thereafter. The no-action/no-build alternative is believed to be

detrimental to the region in terms of economic development, energy use

and particularly air quality. The increased convenience offered by the

new crossing capacity in the area is expected to alleviate these

problems.

The provision of mass transit services for the existing

international bridges would not meet projected commercial, non-

passenger demands. There is currently mass transit offered at the

existing Hidalgo-Reynosa International Bridge, which services some

80,000 commuters per month between Reynosa and downtown McAllen. The

congestion at Hidalgo remains in spite of the use of mass transit, and

the need for the Anzalduas crossing would not be removed by the mass

transit proposal. The proposed Anzalduas International Crossing could

have a beneficial effect on existing mass transit use in the area

because it will reduce delays at the existing Hidalgo-Reynosa

International Bridge. The resulting improvement in the frequency and

speed of bus service may lead to increased use of this service. In sum,

increasing population, urbanization, and commerce in the McAllen,

Hidalgo and Mission, Texas/Reynosa, Mexico, area mean that existing

problems of traffic congestion, including those caused by commercial

traffic, would likely negatively affect the environmental quality of

the area if the additional route provided by the Anzalduas

International Crossing were not provided.

Road Alternative #3 is the Sponsors' preferred alternative. It

differs from Road Alternative #4 only with respect to proposed road

construction south of the Banker Floodway. Road Alternative #3

initially contemplates a four-lane at-grade approach road while Road

Alternative #4 would be constructed entirely on an elevated structure.

Otherwise, and particularly with respect to potential environmental

impacts, there is no significant difference between the two

alternatives provided that agreed-upon mitigation measures with respect

to Road Alternative #3 are taken. Since Road Alternative #3 was the

Sponsors' preferred choice due to its substantially lower cost, a more

detailed assessment of Road Alternative #4 was not considered

necessary. Road Alternatives #1 and #2 involve filling in the flood

plain of the Rio Grande and elicited a particularly negative response,

based in part on environmental concerns, from federal agencies

including the United States Section of the International Boundary and

Water Commission (IBWC) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS).

Therefore, these Road Alternatives were not further evaluated.

Summary of the Assessment of the Potential Environmental Impacts

Resulting From the Proposed Action

The Final Environmental Assessment provides information on the

environmental effects of the alternatives outlined above regarding the

placement of the Anzalduas International Crossing, and ``no-action/no-

build'' and mass transit alternatives. On the basis of the Final

Environmental Assessment, the Department makes the following

determinations regarding the potential environmental impacts of Road

Alternative #3, the preferred alternative.

Air Quality: This project is in an area that is in attainment of

the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). A microscale

analysis for Carbon Monoxide (CO) found that anticipated CO

concentrations are less than the established CO standards of 35 parts

per million (ppm) and 9 ppm for one and eight hour periods,

respectively. The maximum anticipated CO concentration for the year

2014 is 36% for one hour and 60% for eight hours of the CO level of

NAAQS. The impact on air quality from this project will not be

significant.

While there is potential during the construction phase for any of

the alternatives involving new construction to adversely affect air

quality in the short term from fugitive dust emissions in and around

the construction site due to construction operations, these effects may

be mitigated by requiring contractors to minimize exhaust emissions

through emissions control devices, using tarp covers on trucks

transporting refuse and construction waste products on-site, wetting

unpaved roadways, prohibiting any open burning of construction waste

products on-site, and limiting unnecessary idling of construction

vehicles. Restoration of the site by introducing grass and other brush-

type plantings would further minimize fugitive dust emissions.

Surface Hydrology: Development of the Anzalduas International

Crossing will result in an increase in storm water runoff due to the

increase in impervious surfaces. The construction of the proposed

project will adhere to the applicable portions of the McAllen/Mission

surface drainage criteria for the collection and discharge of runoff so

as to not adversely impact downstream properties. Long-term adverse

impacts to surface waters are not anticipated due to the proposed

project.

River Channel and Floodplains: The proposed Border Station will be

sited outside the Rio Grande flood plain, consistent with E.O. 11988

regarding a National Policy on Flood Plain Management which requires

federal agencies to ``avoid to the extent possible the long- and short-

term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of

flood plains. . . .'' The improvements result in zero rise in the

upstream water surface and no loss of valley storage in the segment.

Embankments required for the bridge approaches between the Rio

Grande and the Banker Floodway will be constructed with earth borrowed

from the road right-of-way within the floodway. No new fill dirt will

be imported into the floodway and the roadway will be designed to

balance the existing conveyance within the floodway. A computer

hydraulic analysis performed by the Sponsors indicates that the project

should result in no adverse deflection or obstruction of the normal or

flood flows of the Rio Grande. However, approval by the IBWC will be

considered only after it receives conceptual plans from both the U.S.

and the Mexican sponsors covering project components in the United

States and Mexico.

Water Quality: The construction phase of the Anzalduas

International Crossing may lead to minor temporary impacts on water

quality. Existing water lines and sanitary sewer lines would be

extended to serve the project site from the Cities of Mission and

McAllen. Construction of the Crossing and related facilities will

include measures to prevent sediments from entering the adjacent

waterways. Refuse and wastes from demolition and excavation will be

contained and hauled offsite to a

[[Page 44077]]

suitable place of disposal. Trucks will be routed and unloaded so as to

prevent materials and debris from spilling into waterways. A storm

water retention pond approximately 250 feet by 150 feet will be

constructed south of the north abutment of the Rio Grande bridge that

is designed to intercept and retain runoff from the bridge deck so as

to contain contaminants or spills. A pipe drainage system will be

constructed in the bridge superstructure in order to carry storm water

to the pond.

Hazardous Wastes: The proposed project is not located on or near

any known hazardous waste facilities and will not generate any

hazardous wastes. No mitigation is required. The proposed Border

Station will contain a hazardous waste containment unit in the truck

dock area that would provide temporary storage of hazardous waste if a

spill occurred. The international bridge is drained in a contained

system back to a retention pond near the north abutment. This pond

would provide temporary storage of hazardous waste if a spill occurred

on the bridge deck.

Historical and Archeological Resources: The Texas Archaeological

Research Laboratory determined that there are no recorded

archaeological sites located in the project area. An archaeological and

historical reconnaissance survey and shovel testing carried out at the

direction of the Texas State Historic Preservation Office found no

evidence of archaeological or historic features in the project area. An

unmarked cemetery may exist in the vicinity of the entrance to

Anzalduas County Park, well to the west of the project site. The La

Lomita Historic District, which is listed on the National Register of

Historic Places, is also located to the west and outside of the project

site.

Land Use and Local Development Impacts: The majority of the land in

the project area is used for agriculture and is unincorporated. The

Cities of Mission and McAllen have extraterritorial boundaries that

extend into the area; the Cities are cooperating in the development of

a land use master plan. The City of Granjeno is located north of the

bridge site and comprises approximately 90 homes; three other homes in

the area are surrounded by farmland. The FWS owns several tracts of

land along the Rio Grande which comprise a wildlife corridor. Anzalduas

County Park is owned by Hidalgo County on land acquired as part of the

Anzalduas Dam and Banker Floodway flood control projects.

The construction of the Border Station will require the

displacement of two single-family homes located in agricultural fields.

The Border Station and roadway will impact approximately 236 acres of

cultivated fields; the Border Station will be located approximately

1,000 feet northwest of Granjeno.

The City of McAllen, under the city's property acquisition and

relocation assistance policy, will compensate the property owners being

displaced by the Border Station. The Border Station will be designed

and constructed to minimize impacts to Granjeno; a large landscaped

berm will be constructed along the east side of the Border Station

property to shield the facility. A 500-feet-wide open space buffer will

be preserved between the Border Station and Granjeno.

Threatened and Endangered Species: The FWS has identified four

federally-listed endangered species that may be present in the project

area: the jaguarundi, ocelot, northern aplomado falcon and Walker's

manioc. The Sponsors have developed a detailed ``Endangered Species

Plan'' in consultation and coordination with FWS to ensure that the

bridge will not affect the federally-listed wildlife species known to

exist in the Rio Grande Floodway corridor. Three large wildlife

underpasses will be constructed at agreed locations under the at-grade

segment of the roadway.

The Plan also includes the leasing of 160 acres of land located to

the east of the proposed bridge to the FWS for $1.00 per acre to allow

revegetation of farmlands. The initial lease of the land to the FWS

will revert to a donation when traffic begins to cross the Anzalduas

International Bridge. The Sponsors will execute payment of $50,000 to

the FWS for expenses associated with revegetation after diplomatic

notes have been exchanged between the United States and Mexico

authorizing bridge construction to begin.

The Sponsors will grant Conservation Easements to the FWS covering

a 400-foot-wide strip adjacent to the Rio Grande, a 60-foot-wide strip

of land along the western edge of the right-of-way south of the Banker

Floodway, and 1.6 acres of unused land under the proposed Banker

Floodway Bridge. The Sponsors will also construct a stormwater

retention pond south of the north abutment of the international bridge

and three large wildlife underpasses under the at-grade segment of the

roadway. The revegetation activities should not impede the conveyance

of normal or flood flows in the river and its floodplain. Such

activities will be considered in the same understandings as in River

Channel and Floodplains (page 6 of the FONSI) regarding the deflection

or obstruction these may present.

Traffic Noise: Construction noise is difficult to predict.

Provisions should be included in the plans and specifications that

require the contractor to make every reasonable effort to minimize

construction noise through abatement measures such as work-hour

controls, proper maintenance of equipment muffler systems and usage of

noise-controlled construction equipment. An analysis of the existing

and future traffic noise levels indicates that the proposed project

will not result in any noise impacts at any adjacent land use activity

areas.

Wetlands: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers conducted a site visit

and made a wetland determination of the project area on April 29, 1992.

The Corps determined that the project would not impact any wetland

areas subject to its jurisdiction. Because no wetland impacts are

expected from the project, no wetland mitigation is required.

Environmental Justice: The project area is located in Hidalgo

County, Texas, which the U.S. Census Bureau in 1995 estimated to have a

population of 479,000. The county population is approximately 87%

Hispanic. The majority (99%) of land in the project area is used for

agriculture. As stated above, two houses in the project area will need

to be acquired; one of these two residences is owned by a minority

family. Acquisition of these properties will be accomplished under the

Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies

Act of 1970, as amended. Relocation resources and assistance will be

available to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex or

national origin. The proposed project is expected to have a positive

impact on the economic characteristics of the area and therefore no

mitigation is required.

Minority and low-income populations will not be impacted

disproportionately in an adverse manner by the proposed bridge, nor

will there be any negative impacts to community cohesion or

neighborhood stability.

Conclusion

Analysis of the Environmental Assessment Submitted by the Sponsors

Based upon the Department's independent review of the Final

Environmental Assessment, comments received during its preparation and

comments received by the Department from federal and state agencies

including measures which are proposed to be taken to prevent or

mitigate potentially adverse environmental

[[Page 44078]]

impacts which the Sponsors intend to take, the Department has concluded

that issuance of a Presidential Permit authorizing construction of the

proposed Anzalduas International Crossing, as proposed to be

constructed in Road Alternative #3 as set forth in the Final

Environmental Assessment, would not have a significant impact on the

quality of the human environment within the United States. Accordingly,

a finding of no significant impact is adopted and an EIS will not be

prepared.

Dated: July 23, 1999.

David E. Randolph,

Coordinator, U.S.-Mexico Border Affairs, Office of Mexican Affairs.

[FR Doc. 99-20900 Filed 8-11-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-29-P