[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 45 (Thursday, March 7, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10446-10447]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-5395]



[[Page 10446]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO


Replacement of the Old American Canal, Located in El Paso, TX; 
Notice of Final Finding of No Significant Impact; Notice of 
Availability

AGENCY: United States Section, International Boundary and Water 
Commission, United States and Mexico.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a final finding of no significant 
impact and a final environmental assessment.

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

SUMMARY: Based on the Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) and the 
public comments received, the United States Section, International 
Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC), finds that the proposed action 
of replacement of the existing American Canal is not a major federal 
action that would have a significant adverse effect on the quality of 
the human environment. An Environmental Impact Statement will not be 
prepared for the project. The Final Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) and Final EA have been forwarded to the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency and various Federal, State and local 
agencies and interested parties for information only. No comments are 
requested. The final FONSI and EA are also available on the USIBWC Home 
Page at http://www.ibwc.state.gov under ``What's New,'' and at the 
reference desk at The University of Texas at El Paso Library and the El 
Paso Main Library. A limited number of copies of these documents are 
available upon request from Mr. Fox at USIBWC, 4171 North Mesa Street 
#C-310, El Paso, TX 79902; Telephone: (915) 832-4736; E-mail: 
[email protected].
    The proposed replacement and enlargement of the 1.98-mile-long 
American Canal involves demolishing the deteriorating concrete open 
channel segments of the canal and replacing them with reinforced 
concrete-lined canal segments. The USIBWC is authorized under the Rio 
Grande American Canal Extension Act of 1990 (``RGACE'' or the Act of 
1990), Public Law 101-438, dated October 15, 1990, to construct, 
operate, and maintain an extension of the existing American Canal in El 
Paso, Texas; which would provide for a more equitable distribution of 
waters between the United States and Mexico, reduce water losses, and 
minimize many hazards to public safety.
    Water for both irrigation and domestic use in El Paso County is 
diverted into the American Canal at the American Dam located on the Rio 
Grande approximately 3 miles upstream from downtown El Paso. The 
American Dam and American Canal were constructed from 1937 to 1938, 
within United States territory to divert United States waters away from 
the Rio Grande, and to allow into the international reach of the Rio 
Grande only those waters assigned to the Republic of Mexico under the 
Convention of 1906. This ensured that United States waters diverted at 
the American Dam would be completely retained within the United States.
    In the Act of 1990, the United States Congress also authorized the 
negotiation of international agreements for the RGACE to convey Mexican 
waters authorized under the 1906 Convention. In view of the conveyance 
water losses and the safety issues inherent in Mexico's existing canal 
system, the RGACE was designed to accommodate Mexico's annual 60,000 
acre-foot allotment of water at 335 cubic feet per second (cfs), should 
Mexico request its allotment delivered at this location.

Alternatives Considered

    Five alternatives were considered during the preparation of the 
environmental assessment, including the Open Channel Alternative (the 
Proposed Action Alternative) and the No Action Alternative. All four 
action alternatives include (1) increasing the canal capacity to 1535 
cfs, (2) demolition of existing canal structures and open channel 
concrete lining, (3) reconstructing and enlarging the 400-foot open 
channel segment immediately downstream from the headgates and the 100-
foot open channel segment upstream from the gaging station, (4) not 
repairing or replacing the two closed conduit segments under West 
Paisano Drive, (5) installing fences to minimize entrance into the 
canal, (6) installing safety equipment to reduce canal drownings, (7) 
removing the Smelter Bridge and the abutments of Harts Mill Bridge, and 
(8) providing mitigation for the loss of the Smelter Bridge by 
preparing Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) Level III 
documentation of the structure (including existing and original 
construction drawings, captioned photographs, and written data). The 
alternatives are summarized below:
    Alternative 1--Closed Conduit Alternative: All existing open 
channel segments (Upper, Middle, and Lower) between the American Dam 
and International Dam would be replaced with closed conduits, with the 
two excepted open reaches in the Upper Open Channel segment. This 
Alternative would be the most expensive to construct and would lose the 
historic predominantly open visual character of the canal.
    Alternative 2--Closed Conduit/Open Channel Alternative A: The 
Middle Open Channel segment would be replaced with a closed conduit. 
The Upper and Lower Open Channel segments would be reconstructed and 
enlarged. This alternative would accomplish all the stated objectives, 
but would lose some of the historic predominantly open visual character 
of the canal. Choosing this alternative would likely both reduce the 
number of drownings in the canal, but increase the number of pedestrian 
traffic fatalities on nearby highways. If final engineering design 
studies determine the necessity of a closed conduit for the middle 
canal segment, this alternative would become the preferred alternative.
    Alternative 3--Closed Conduit/Open Channel Alternative B: The 
Middle and Lower Open Channel segments would be replaced with closed 
conduits. The Upper Open Channel segment would be reconstructed and 
enlarged. This alternative would accomplish all the objectives, but at 
a cost second highest among the action alternatives. It would also 
likely triple the number of pedestrian traffic deaths on nearby 
highways.
    Alternative 4--Open Channel Alternative (the Proposed Action 
Alternative): The Upper, Middle, and Lower Open Channel segments would 
be reconstructed and enlarged. This Alternative would accomplish all 
the necessary objectives at the lowest construction cost. It would 
result in the lowest number of pedestrian traffic fatalities on nearby 
highways. Though the original canal lining would be replaced, this 
Alternative would preserve the historic predominantly open visual 
character of the canal. (It should be noted that if final engineering 
design studies for the replacement of the old American Canal determine 
the necessity of a closed conduit for the middle canal segment, the 
proposed action alternative would become Alternative 2.)
    Alternative 5--No Action Alternative: The three open channel 
segments would be left untouched, with no replacements, enlargements, 
or repairs of any canal segments. While this alternative preserves 
intact the historic Smelter Bridge, it does not accomplish any of the 
stated objectives. The annual number of drownings in the Canal would 
not be reduced. Without reconstruction or major repair of the canal, a 
serious canal failure is likely within the next five years, especially 
during the peak irrigation period with

[[Page 10447]]

the highest canal flow. Such a canal failure would likely close the 
American Canal for at least one month during costly emergency repairs. 
If the canal flow was disrupted for just one month due to repairs, the 
El Paso Water Utilities production of potable water would be reduced by 
80 to 120 million gallons per day, and over a thousand El Paso County 
farmers could lose their crops, likely resulting in up to 500 
bankruptcies. The No Action Alternative is not considered to be a 
viable alternative.
    The preliminary engineering design studies for the replacement of 
the old American Canal indicate that a closed design may become the 
preferred alternative for the middle canal segment. Limited right-of-
way constraints and existing infrastructure restrictions will dictate 
the proper design and construction methods to minimize the adverse 
effects to the public and adjacent landowners along the project. The 
reported project conditions will remain the same, but the aesthetics of 
the predominantly open canal will change. The USIBWC will consult with 
the Texas State Historic Preservation Officer should the preliminary 
canal design study recommend that the subject portion of the open canal 
be replaced with pre-cast box culvert.
    The Draft FONSI and Draft EA were distributed November 21, 2000. 
The Notice of Draft FONSI for the Draft EA was published in the Federal 
Register on November 29, 2000. The Legal Notice of the Draft FONSI and 
Draft EA was published in the El Paso Times on December 2, 2000. The 
Public Comment period extended from November 21, 2000 through January 
2, 2001. Public comments received were compiled into the Final EA, 
dated October 31, 2001. The Final EA finds that the proposed action 
does not constitute a major federal action that would cause a 
significant local, regional, or national adverse impact on the 
environment, because the Proposed Action Alternative would:
    1. Improve structural stability of the American Canal, providing a 
reliable conveyance structure to transport flows of allocated water 
from the Rio Grande to El Paso County farms and to existing and planned 
El Paso Water Utilities water treatment facilities. The Rio Grande will 
be unchanged from existing conditions under USIBWC jurisdiction;
    2. Minimize seepage loss through the cracks in the canal lining;
    3. Provide the full design capacity (1535 cfs) influent into the 
RGACE;
    4. Improve safety and reduce the risk of accidental drownings in 
the American Canal by installing fences and safety equipment;
    5. Preserve the historic predominantly open channel character of 
the Canal; and
    6. Preserve historical and photographic documentation of the 
historic Smelter Bridge per HAER Level III Standard.
    Based on the Final Environmental Assessment and the implementation 
of the proposed historical mitigation, it has been determined that the 
proposed action will not have a significant adverse effect on the 
environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement is not warranted.

    Dated: March 1, 2002.
Mario Lewis,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 02-5395 Filed 3-6-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-03-P