Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for the Kennedy-Bechara Segment of the Authorized Rio Puerto Nuevo (Puerto Rico) Flood Control Project
Federal RegisterSep 9, 1999
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(SEIS) for the Kennedy-Bechara Segment of the Authorized Rio Puerto
Nuevo (Puerto Rico) Flood Control Project
AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Jacksonville District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is
finalizing the design for the Kennedy-Bechara segment of the existing
Federal flood control project at Rio Puerto Neuvo, located in San Juan
and Guaynabo, Puerto Rico, and is considering several alternatives to
provide the authorized 100 year level of protection in this area. New
alternatives have been developed that may eliminate the need for pumps
or other mechanical drainage. A Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (D-SEIS) will be prepared for the project.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the proposed action
and Draft EIS can be answered by Ms. Barbara Cintron, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Jacksonville District, Planning Division, P.O. Box 4970,
Jacksonville, Florida 32232-0019; Telephone 904-232-1692.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. The proposed action consists of design changes to one segment of
the Congressionally authorized Rio Puerto Nuevo Federal flood control
project, located in San Juan, Puerto Rico. This large project was
documented in a Final Environmental Impact Statement in 1984, and has
been under construction since 1995. Detailed construction design is
completed in stages, following the guidance of the General Design
memorandum (GDM) published in 1991, and an Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) published in 1993. At this
time alternative detailed designs are being considered for the Kennedy-
Bechara area. New data and a re-evaluation of previous designs for the
area led to development of new alternatives for this segment.
Alternatives so far developed include the ``base plan'' as discussed in
the GDM, and three additional options, two involving gravity drainage
and one involving pumped drainage.
2. Alternatives under consideration involve spatial and structural
variations in project features that would convey storm runoff to the
receiving body (San Juan Bay). Associated with each alternative, there
may be tradeoffs in the project cost, operation and maintenance
requirements, and adverse effects on natural and manmade features of
the environment, including effects on wetlands and other natural and
cultural resources.
3. A scoping letter will be used to invite comments on alternatives
and issues from Federal, Commonwealth and local agencies, and other
interested private organizations and individuals. A public scoping
meeting has not been scheduled at this time but may be requested and
will be scheduled if the degree of public interest appears to warrant
it.
4. The D-SEIS will analyze issues related to flood reduction
potential, water quality, wetlands impacts, excavated material disposal
alternatives, infrastructure effects, cultural resources impacts,
socio-economic impacts and effects on the San Juan Bay Estuary System.
5. The alternative flood control features will be reviewed under
the provisions of appropriate laws and regulations, including the
Endangered Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, the
National Historic Preservation Act, the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act,
and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Management and Conservation Act.
6. The D-SEIS is expected to be available for public review in the
last quarter of Calendar Year 1999.
James C. Duck,
Chief, Planning Division.
[FR Doc. 99-23356 Filed 9-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-AJ-M
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.