[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36887-36888]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18020]


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

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 long-term 
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

[[Page 36888]]

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