[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 117 (Friday, June 17, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36487-36489]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13143]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION

[FRL-9919-01-R9]

United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Mitigation of Contaminated
Transboundary Flows Project

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); United States
International Boundary and Water Commission.

ACTION: Notice of availability of draft programmatic environmental
impact statement; notice of virtual public comment meetings; request
for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with regulations implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as amended, the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. International Boundary and Water
Commission (USIBWC), as joint lead agencies, have prepared a Draft
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Draft PEIS) for the
proposed United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) Mitigation of
Contaminated Transboundary Flows Project (the Proposed Action). The
Proposed Action involves the planning, design, and construction of
infrastructure to reduce transboundary flows of untreated wastewater
(sewage), trash, and sediment that routinely enter the U.S. from Mexico
via the Tijuana River, its tributaries, and across the maritime
boundary along the San Diego County coast. These transboundary flows
impact public health and the environment and have been linked to beach
closures along the San Diego County coast. EPA and USIBWC have
evaluated the Proposed Action, including alternatives, located in the
Tijuana River area in southern San Diego County, California in the U.S.
and in the Tijuana region in Mexico. This Notice initiates the comment
process by inviting comments from Federal, State, and local agencies;
Native American tribes; interested stakeholders; and the public on the
Proposed Action, including alternatives, and environmental consequences
examined in the Draft PEIS. EPA and USIBWC are also providing notice of
virtual public comment meetings that are open to all interested
parties.

DATES: Public comment meetings will be held virtually on July 19, 2022,
6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) and July 20, 2022, 2
p.m. to 4 p.m. (PDT). A formal presentation on the proposed project
will be provided at the meetings, followed by an opportunity for public
comment. Written public comments are due to EPA and USIBWC by 5:00 p.m.
(PDT) within the 45 days from the date of the publication of the EPA
Notification of Availability of Programmatic Environmental Impact
Statements in the Federal Register. Please go to: https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-water-infrastructure/usmca-tijuana-river-watershed for more
information regarding the public comment meetings.

ADDRESSES: Written comments shall be submitted to the following email
address: [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Borowiec,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background: EPA and USIBWC, as joint lead agencies, in accordance
with the requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), Council on
Environmental Quality NEPA Implementing Regulations (40 Code of Federal
Regulations [CFR] 1500-1508 [2022]), EPA Procedures for Implementing
NEPA (40 CFR part 6), and USIBWC NEPA Implementing Procedures (48 FR
44083), have prepared a Draft PEIS for the Proposed Action. EPA and
USIBWC invite public comment on the scope of the Draft PEIS, the
Proposed Action (including alternatives considered), specific
environmental issues evaluated, relevant information and analyses, the
identified impacts of the alternatives, and applicable mitigation
measures.
    The San Diego-Tijuana region has faced persistent transboundary
flows of contaminated wastewater originating in Mexico for many years.
The three primary entryways of these transboundary flows into the U.S.
are in coastal waters of the Pacific Ocean, the Tijuana River, and
tributaries flowing north through canyons to the Tijuana River.
Seasonal marine currents cause coastal discharges of largely untreated
wastewater (sewage) from the Tijuana area to migrate north along the
Pacific Ocean coast into the U.S. These discharges impact southern San
Diego County beaches, especially during the summer. Additionally,
transboundary flows in the Tijuana River and its

canyon tributaries routinely reach the U.S., bringing untreated
wastewater (sewage), trash, and sediment into the U.S. These
contaminated flows can reach the Pacific Ocean through the Tijuana
River Valley and Estuary and migrate north along the coast, compounding
the impacts of coastal discharges from the Tijuana area. Collectively,
these polluted transboundary flows impact the environment and public
health in communities along the border and the coast, public access to
beaches and recreational opportunities in southern California, and the
personnel and activities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)
and the U.S. Navy.
    For several years, EPA and USIBWC have engaged with agencies,
elected officials, and stakeholder groups in the San Diego-Tijuana
region in both the U.S. and Mexico to address transboundary pollution
issues. The USMCA Implementation Act, signed into law in January 2020,
appropriated funds to EPA for implementation of wastewater
infrastructure projects at the U.S.-Mexico border and authorized EPA,
in coordination with eligible public entities, to plan, design, and
construct wastewater (including stormwater) treatment projects in the
Tijuana River area. In accordance with the USMCA legislation, EPA
established the Eligible Public Entities Coordinating Group, consisting
of Federal, State, and local stakeholders, and solicited their input on
a set of project options to be considered for evaluation.
    On April 5, 2021, EPA published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare
an EIS (86 FR 17595) for the Proposed Action. Since the NOI was issued,
EPA identified specific alternatives to be evaluated and prepared a
Draft Programmatic EIS (Draft PEIS) for the Proposed Action, which sets
forth a framework for tiered decision making in accordance with 40 CFR
1501.11.
    Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action: In accordance with the
Clean Water Act and the USMCA Implementation Act, the purpose and need
of this action is to reduce transboundary flows from Tijuana that
convey pollutants, sewage, and/or trash into the U.S. and cause adverse
public health and environmental impacts in the Tijuana River watershed
and neighboring coastal areas in the U.S. as described in the preceding
section.
    Purpose of the Programmatic EIS: The Draft PEIS is a programmatic
NEPA document that evaluates environmental impacts of broad agency
actions such as a wide range of individual projects, implementation
over a long timeframe, or implementation across a large geographic
area. The Draft PEIS establishes a tiering process for subsequent
agency decisions that is supported, in part, by the analysis detailed
in the Draft PEIS. The initial programmatic decision to be made in this
Draft PEIS is whether EPA and the USIBWC should consider funding and
implementing water infrastructure projects that reduce transboundary
flows in the Tijuana River watershed and adjacent coastal areas. The
Draft PEIS evaluates: (1) the No-Action Alternative (no disbursement of
funding and continuation of current wastewater management practices;
(2) Alternative 1 (a limited approach); or (3) Alternative 2 (a more
comprehensive solution). The Core projects found in Alternative 1 are
sufficiently developed to be ready for decision making and, after
completing the NEPA process, would be considered analyzed in sufficient
detail for immediate action. In contrast, Alternative 2 includes a
larger range of projects known as the Supplemental Projects, several of
which are not yet ready for decision making. These Supplemental
Projects require additional consideration in subsequent tiered NEPA
documents before a decision can be made and action can be taken (for
additional information on tiering, refer to 40 CFR 1501.11). By
establishing this Draft PEIS, EPA and USIBWC aim to accomplish the
following:
     Make a broad programmatic decision about which funding
approach to take,
     Provide a comprehensive baseline analysis from which
subsequent site-specific proposals (Supplemental Projects) can be
tiered,
     Efficiently analyze and make decisions on funds for Core
Projects that are more evolved in planning and design than Supplemental
Projects and thus ready for decision making,
     Avoid repetition by using the Draft PEIS as a foundation
for the environmental review in subsequent tiered NEPA documents, and
     Streamline the later environmental review processes of
Supplemental Projects so that they may move forward as soon as they are
sufficiently developed for decision making and action.
    Proposed Action and Alternatives: The EPA and IBWC's Proposed
Action is the implementation of projects to address impacts from
transboundary flows in the Tijuana River watershed and adjacent coastal
areas. Because of the programmatic nature of the decisions to be made,
only the Core projects could be implemented at the completion of this
NEPA process. The Supplemental projects would require additional tiered
review before being implemented. The Proposed Action addresses the
purpose and need stated above by:
     Reducing the generation and/or discharge of contaminated
flows from point and nonpoint sources of pollution in the Tijuana
region,
     Improving the collection and/or treatment of contaminated
flows in the Tijuana region before they reach the U.S.-Mexico border,
and
     Improving the collection and/or treatment of contaminated
transboundary flows in the U.S.
    The Draft PEIS evaluates a No-Action Alternative and two
alternatives for implementing the Proposed Action:
     No-Action Alternative. This alternative would not
implement the Proposed Action. NEPA requires that a No-Action
Alternative be analyzed to determine the environmental consequences of
not undertaking the Proposed Action, and thereby providing a baseline
against which the potential beneficial and adverse environmental
impacts of action alternatives can be evaluated and compared.
     Alternative 1: Core Projects. Under this alternative, EPA
would fund some components of the Comprehensive Infrastructure Solution
that are the responsibility of the U.S., pursuant to the terms of the
final cost sharing agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. This approach
would fund and implement only those projects that are sufficiently
developed and ready for decision making and is not expected to require
substantial additional U.S. funding beyond the USMCA Implementation Act
appropriation and funds from existing programs such as EPA's Border
Water Infrastructure Program (BWIP). Alternative 1 includes four Core
Projects: Projects A (Expanded South Bay International Wastewater
Treatment Plant [ITP]), B (Tijuana Canyon Flows to ITP), C (Tijuana
Sewer Repairs), and D (Advanced Primary Treatment Plant [APTP] Phase
1).
     Alternative 2: Core and Supplemental Projects. Under this
alternative, EPA would use U.S. appropriations to fund all components
of the Comprehensive Infrastructure Solution that are the
responsibility of the U.S., pursuant to the terms of the final cost
sharing agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. This more comprehensive
approach is expected to require additional funding beyond the USMCA
Implementation Act appropriations and funds from existing programs such
as EPA's BWIP. EPA is in the process of identifying additional
opportunities for Federal funding and/

or State appropriations that could be used to fully implement the
Comprehensive Infrastructure Solution. Alternative 2 includes the four
Core Projects (from Alternative 1) and six Supplemental Projects (10
projects in total) and would provide a more comprehensive solution for
reducing contaminated transboundary flows. The six Supplemental
Projects are Projects E (APTP Phase 2), F (U.S.-side River Diversion to
APTP), G (New San Antonio de los Buenos Wastewater Treatment Plant
[SABTP]), H (Tijuana Wastewater Treatment Plant Treated Effluent
Reuse), I (ITP Treated Effluent Reuse), and J (Trash Boom[s]).
    A preferred alternative has not been identified at this time.
Descriptions of the alternatives, including descriptions of Core and
Supplemental Projects, can be found in the Draft PEIS and on the
project website at https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-water-infrastructure/usmca-tijuana-river-watershed.
    Summary of Expected Impacts: The Proposed Action is expected to
have beneficial impacts to public safety and water quality in the
Tijuana River watershed and adjacent coastal areas. The Proposed Action
covers a large geographic area and would impact a broad range of
resource areas, including water resources, geologic resources, the
coastal zone, air quality, climate, biological resources, cultural
resources, land use, visual resources, solid and hazardous waste,
energy, public services and utilities, public health and safety,
transportation, noise, socioeconomics, and environmental justice. The
impacts to these resources are analyzed in the Draft PEIS.
    Anticipated Permits and Authorization: Implementation of the
Proposed Action may require Federal authorizations, permits, or
consultants pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act,
National Historic Preservation Act, and Coastal Zone Management Act.
EPA has initiated engagement with Federal agencies such as the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and is working closely with other binational,
State, and local agencies and stakeholders.
    Public Comment: EPA and USIBWC have established a 45-day public
comment period for the Draft PEIS. The 45-day public comment period
will start upon publication of the EPA Notice of Availability (NOA) of
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements in the Federal Register.
Comments on the Draft PEIS must be received by 5 p.m. Pacific Daylight
Time within 45 days after publication of the NOA. EPA and USIBWC are
requesting written comments from Federal, State, and local governments,
industry, non-governmental organizations, and the general public on:
     The range of alternatives considered,
     The environmental issues evaluated,
     The submitted alternatives, information, and analyses and
the summary thereof, and/or
     Measures to mitigate the environmental consequences of the
Proposed Action.
    Public comment meetings will be held virtually on July 19, 2022.
and July 20, 2022. Consult the ``Dates'' section above for further
information on the public comment meetings. All interested parties are
encouraged to attend. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1503.3, comments on the Draft
PEIS shall be as specific as possible, may address the adequacy of the
Draft PEIS and/or the merits of the alternatives, and shall provide
sufficient detail to meaningfully participate and fully inform EPA and
USIBWC of the commenter's position. Commenters should explain the
importance of their comments to the consideration of potential impacts
and alternatives to the Proposed Action, as well as economic and
employment impacts, and other impacts affecting the quality of the
human environment. Comments on the submitted alternatives, information,
and analyses and summary should be as specific as possible. Comments
and objections of any kind shall be raised within the comment period on
the Draft PEIS. Commentors should reference the corresponding section
or page number of the Draft PEIS; propose specific changes where
possible; and include data sources and methodologies supporting any
proposed changes.
    Estimated Date of Final PEIS Release: Once the public review and
comment process is complete, EPA and USIBWC will prepare a Final PEIS
and will publish a Federal Register notice announcing its public
availability. EPA and USIBWC will provide the public with an
opportunity to review and comment on the Final PEIS. After EPA and
USIBWC consider those comments, EPA and USIBWC will prepare the final
ROD and similarly announce its availability. Comments received during
the Draft PEIS review period will be made available in the Final PEIS.
The Final PEIS is expected to be released by November 2022.

Martha Guzman Aceves,
Regional Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency Region IX.
Mariaelena Giner,
Commissioner (U.S. Section), International Boundary and Water
Commission, United States and Mexico United States Section.
[FR Doc. 2022-13143 Filed 6-16-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31474-31475]
[FR Doc No: 2023-10435]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2022-1267; Airspace Docket No. 22-AAL-23]
RIN 2120-AA66

Revocation of Federal Colored Airway A-9; Bettles, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action removes Colored Federal airway Amber 9 (A-9) due
to the planned decommissioning of the Evansville, AK (EAV), Non-
Directional Beacon (NDB), which provides navigation guidance for the
affected route. The EAV, NDB is scheduled to be decommissioned
effective on June 15, 2023.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, August 10, 2023. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11
and publication of conforming amendments.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), all
comments received, this final rule, and all background material may be
viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the FAA Docket number.
Electronic retrieval help and guidelines are available on the website.
It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Rules and Regulations Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations
Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the
efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that
authority as it amends the route structure in Alaska to maintain the
efficient flow of air traffic within the National Airspace System.

History

    The FAA published a NPRM for Docket No. FAA-2022-1267 in the
Federal Register (87 FR 65544; October 31, 2022), removing Colored
Federal airway A-9 in the vicinity of Bettles, AK, due to the
decommissioning the EAV, NDB. Interested parties were invited to
participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on
the proposal. No comments were received.

Incorporation by Reference

    Colored Federal airways are published in paragraph 6009 of FAA
Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document amends the current version of that order, FAA Order JO
7400.11G, dated August 19, 2022, and effective September 15, 2022. FAA
Order JO 7400.11G is publicly available as listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document. These amendments will be published in the
next update to FAA Order JO 7400.11.
    FAA Order JO 7400.11G lists Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas,
air traffic service routes, and reporting points.

The Rule

    This action amends 14 CFR part 71 by removing Colored Federal
airway A-9 in the vicinity of Bettles, AK, due to the decommissioning
of the EAV, NDB. The existing Very High Frequency (VHF) Omnidirectional
Range (VOR) Federal airway V-444, and United States Area Navigation
(RNAV) route T-232 provide alternative routes to A-9.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore: (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures
(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation
of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that only affects air traffic procedures
and air navigation, it is certified that this rule, when promulgated,
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    The FAA has determined that his action of removing Colored Federal
airway A-9 due to the planned decommissioning of the Evansville, AK
(EAV), NDB in the vicinity of Bettles, AK qualifies for categorical
exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) and its implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 1500, and in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures, paragraph 5-6.5a, which categorically excludes from further
environmental impact review rulemaking actions that designate or modify
classes of airspace areas,

airways, routes, and reporting points (see 14 CFR part 71, Designation
of Class A, B, C, D, and E Airspace Areas; Air Traffic Service Routes;
and Reporting Points), and paragraph 5-6.5k, which categorically
excludes from further environmental review the publication of existing
air traffic control procedures that do not essentially change existing
tracks, create new tracks, change altitude, or change concentration of
aircraft on these tracks. As such, this action is not expected to
result in any potentially significant environmental impacts. In
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, paragraph 5-2 regarding
Extraordinary Circumstances, the FAA has reviewed this action for
factors and circumstances in which a normally categorically excluded
action may have a significant environmental impact requiring further
analysis. Accordingly, the FAA has determined that no extraordinary
circumstances exist that warrant preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact study.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO
7400.11G, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 19,
2022, and effective September 15, 2022, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6009 Colored Federal Airways.

* * * * *

A-9 [Removed]

* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 11, 2023.
Brian Konie,
Acting Manager, Airspace Rules and Regulations.
[FR Doc. 2023-10435 Filed 5-16-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P