[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 222 (Wednesday, November 18, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 72108-72113]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29447]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[FWS-R8-ES-2015-N184; FF08ESMF00-FXES11120800000-156]
Proposed Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation
Plan for Western Butte County, California: Environmental Impact
Statement
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine Fisheries
Service, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of availability; receipt of permit application, joint
Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report, joint
draft Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan;
request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that we, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS), have prepared a draft environmental impact
statement and environmental impact report (DEIS/R) under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1967, as amended (NEPA), and its
implementing regulations. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) are cooperating agencies on the DEIS/R.
This notice also announces the receipt of applications for 50-year
incidental take permits under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. The applicants prepared the Draft Butte Regional Conservation
Plan (Draft Plan, or BRCP) pursuant to the Act and the California
Natural Community Conservation Planning Act of 2002 (NCCPA). The
permits are needed to authorize the incidental take of 39 covered
species that could result from activities covered under the proposed
Draft Plan. We also announce meetings and invite comments.
DATES: Submitting Comments: To ensure consideration, written comments
must be received by February 16, 2016.
Public Meetings: Three public meetings will be held:
1. Monday, January 25, 2016; 6-8 p.m., Chico Masonic Center, 1110
W. East Ave., Chico, CA 95926.
2. Tuesday, January 26, 2016; 2-4 p.m., Oroville Southside
Community Center, 2959 Lower Wyandotte Rd., Oroville, CA 95966.
3. Tuesday, January 26, 2016; 6-8 p.m., Gridley City Council
Chambers, 685 Kentucky St., Gridley, CA 95948.
ADDRESSES: Submitting Comments: Please address written comments to one
of the following individuals:
1. Mike Thomas, Chief, Conservation Planning Division; or Eric
Tattersall, Deputy Assistant Field Supervisor, by mail/hand-delivery at
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,
2800 Cottage Way, W-2605, Sacramento, California 95825; or by facsimile
to (916) 414-6713. You may telephone (916) 414-6600 to make an
appointment during regular business hours to drop off comments at the
Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office.
2. Gretchen Umlauf, by mail/hand-delivery at National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, West Coast Region, National Marine
Fisheries Service, 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 5-100, Sacramento,
California 95814; or by facsimile to (916) 930-3629. You may telephone
(916) 930-5646 to make an appointment during regular business hours to
drop off comments at the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Please send comments related specifically to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process to the Jon Clark, Executive
Director, Butte County Association of Governments, 2580 Sierra Sunrise
Terrace, Suite 100, Chico, California 95928. You may also submit
comments by facsimile to (530) 879-2444.
[[Page 72109]]
Reviewing Documents: You may obtain copies of the Draft Plan and
DEIS/R from any of the individuals in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
or from the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office Web site at http://www.fws.gov/sacramento. Copies of these documents are also available
for public inspection, by appointment, during regular business hours,
at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office. Additionally, hard-bound
copies of the DEIS/R and Draft Plan are available for viewing, or for
partial or complete duplication, at the following locations in Chico:
Butte County Association of Governments, 2580 Sierra
Sunrise Terrace, Suite 100;
Biggs Branch Library, 464A B Street;
Chico Branch Library, 1108 Sherman Avenue;
Gridley Branch Library, 299 Spruce Street; and
Oroville Branch Library, 1820 Mitchell Avenue.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
(1) Rick Kuyper, Endangered Species Division; Mike Thomas, Chief,
Conservation Planning Division; or Eric Tattersall, Deputy Assistant
Field Supervisor, at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office address
above or at (916) 414-6600 (telephone); or
(2) Gretchen Umlauf, National Marine Fisheries Service, at the
address above or at (916) 930-5646 (telephone).
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf, please call
the Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice advises the public that we, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), have prepared a draft
environmental impact statement and environmental impact report (DEIS/R)
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1967, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; NEPA), and its implementing regulations in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 1506.6. The National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are cooperating agencies on
the DEIS/R.
This notice also announces the receipt of applications from the
County of Butte, City of Oroville, City of Chico, City of Biggs, City
of Gridley, Butte County Association of Governments (BCAG), California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Western Canal Water District
(WCWD), Biggs--West Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, and
Richvale Irrigation District (applicants) for 50-year incidental take
permits under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.; Act) from FWS and NMFS. The applicants prepared the Draft
Butte Regional Conservation Plan (Draft Plan, or BRCP) pursuant to
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act and the California Natural Community
Conservation Planning Act of 2002 (NCCPA). A twelfth permit will also
be considered for the implementing entity that will form prior to
permit issuance. The implementing entity is described in the Draft Plan
and Draft IA and will be composed of representatives from each of the
applicants. The applicants are requesting the authorization of
incidental take for 39 covered species that could result from
activities covered under the proposed Draft Plan. We announce meetings
and invite comments.
Introduction
The Draft Plan is a comprehensive, regional habitat conservation
plan designed to provide long-term conservation and management of
natural communities, sensitive species, and the habitats upon which
those species depend, while accommodating other important land uses.
The Draft Plan is being submitted as a habitat conservation plan
pursuant to the Act, and a natural community conservation plan under
the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (NCCPA).
FWS will serve as the administrative lead for all actions related
to this Federal Register notice for the EIS component of the EIS/EIR
and receipt of a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for species under FWS's
jurisdiction. NMFS will serve as the administrative lead for all
actions related to this Federal Register notice for receipt of a
section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for species under NMFS's jurisdiction. BCAG
will serve as the State lead agency under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) for the EIR component. BCAG, in accordance with the
CEQA, is publishing a similar notice.
In addition to this notice of the draft EIR/EIS, EPA is publishing
a notice announcing the draft EIS, as required under section 309 of the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.). The publication of EPA's notice
is the official start of the minimum requirement for a public comment
period for an EIS (see EPA's Role in the EIS Process).
Background Information
Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544 et seq.) and Federal
regulations (50 CFR part 17) prohibit the taking of fish and wildlife
species listed as endangered or threatened under section 4 of the Act.
Take of federally listed fish or wildlife is defined under the Act as
to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect listed species, or attempt to engage in such conduct. The term
``harass'' is defined in the regulations as to carry out actions that
create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as
to significantly disrupt normal behavioral patterns, which include, but
are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). The
term ``harm'' is defined in the regulations as significant habitat
modification or degradation that results in death or injury of listed
species by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns,
including breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). However,
under specified circumstances, the Service may issue permits that allow
the take of federally listed species, provided that the take that
occurs is incidental to, but not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful
activity.
Regulations governing permits for endangered and threatened species
are at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32, respectively. Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act contains provisions for issuing such incidental take permits to
non-Federal entities for the take of endangered and threatened species,
provided the following criteria are met:
(1) The taking will be incidental;
(2) The applicants will, to the maximum extent practicable,
minimize and mitigate the impact of such taking;
(3) The applicants will develop a proposed HCP and ensure that
adequate funding for the HCP will be provided;
(4) The taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the
survival and recovery of the species in the wild; and
(5) The applicants will carry out any other measures that the
Service may require as being necessary or appropriate for the purposes
of the HCP.
Proposed Project
In 2007, the BRCP Planning Agreement was entered into and by and
among the Local Agencies, BCAG, CDFG, the Service and NMFS. In 2010,
Western Canal Water District, Biggs West Gridley Water District, Butte
Water District, Richvale Irrigation District and Caltrans became
signatories to the Planning Agreement. The Planning Agreement set out
the initial scope of the program and defined the roles and
responsibilities of the parties in the development of the BRCP. The
Planning Agreement has helped guide the BRCP planning process and to
define the initial scope of the effort. BCAG served
[[Page 72110]]
as the lead in coordination of the process and preparation of the BRCP.
The BRCP's conservation strategy proposes to provide a regional
approach for the long-term conservation of covered species (see Covered
Species below) and natural communities within the BRCP plan area while
allowing for compatible future land use and development under county
and city general plan updates and the regional transportation plans.
The BRCP identifies and addresses the covered activities carried out by
the permittees that may result in take of covered species within the
BRCP plan area.
The proposed BRCP is consistent with and is intended to support
compliance with other Federal and State wildlife and related laws and
regulations, other local conservation planning efforts, and the city
and county general plans. The BRCP was developed in coordination with
the development of city and county general plans in the BRCP plan area,
with feedback loops between the BRCP and general plan processes. These
feedback loops identified opportunities and constraints and allowed for
improvements in the general plans regarding the avoidance and
minimization of impacts on biological resources and the development of
open space and conservation elements that dovetail with the BRCP.
The proposed BRCP is designed to streamline and coordinate existing
processes for review and permitting of public and private activities
that potentially affect protected species. To meet this goal, the BRCP
sets out a conservation strategy that includes measures intended to
ensure that impacts on covered species and habitats related to covered
activities are avoided, minimized, or mitigated, as appropriate. These
covered activities encompass the range of existing and future
activities that are associated with much of the regional economy (see
Covered Activities, below). The proposed conservation strategy includes
establishing a reserve system that would be composed of an estimated
89,600 acres of large, contiguous blocks of land that would be
permanently preserved, monitored, and managed, and restoration of an
estimated 1,121 acres of covered species' habitat. The conservation
strategy would remain in rough step with impacts, and the reserve
system would be assembled according to predefined milestones throughout
the proposed 50-year permit term.
Plan Area
The BRCP plan area (or permit area) includes approximately 564,270
acres, including the western lowlands and foothills of Butte County.
The BRCP Plan Area is bounded on the west by county boundaries with
Tehama, Glenn, and Colusa Counties; bounded on the south by boundaries
with Sutter and Yuba Counties; bounded on the north by the boundary
with Tehama County; and bounded on the east by the upper extent of
landscape dominated by oak woodland natural communities. Specifically,
the eastern oak woodland boundary is defined by a line below which land
cover types dominated by oak trees comprise more than one half of the
land cover present, plus a small portion of the City of Chico that
extends above the oak zone. The boundary of the BRCP plan area is based
on political, ecological, and hydrologic factors.
Covered Activities
The proposed section 10 incidental take permit may allow take of
wildlife covered species resulting from covered activities on non-
Federal land in the proposed BRCP plan area. BCAG and local partners
are requesting incidental take authorization for covered species that
could be affected by activities identified in the BRCP. The activities
within the BRCP plan area for which incidental take permit coverage is
requested include construction and maintenance of facilities and
infrastructure, both public and private, that are consistent with local
general plans, and local, State, and Federal laws. The following is a
summary of covered activities as proposed in the BRCP. Activities are
grouped geographically (within urban permit areas, outside urban permit
areas, and within the system of conservation lands established in the
BRCP) and are further grouped into activities that result in permanent
development, and activities involving maintenance of existing or new
facilities that are expected to occur over time during the permit
duration. This following list is not intended to be exhaustive; rather,
it provides an overview of the types of activities that would be
expected to occur.
1. Activities within Urban Permit Areas (UPAs) are areas within the
BRCP plan area within which the cities and County anticipate urban
development under their respective general plan updates.
a. Permanent Development: covered activities within UPAs as a
result of new construction and improvements to existing facilities are
covered, including the following types of activities: residential,
commercial, public facilities, and industrial construction;
recreational activity-related construction; transportation facilities
construction; pipeline installation; utility services (above and below
ground); waste and wastewater management activities; flood control and
stormwater management activities; and in-water permanent development
projects.
b. Recurring Maintenance: covered activities within UPAs include
maintenance of existing and new facilities resulting in temporary
impacts, including the following types of activities: recreational
activities; transportation facilities maintenance; pipeline
maintenance; utility services; waste and wastewater facilities
management activities; flood control and stormwater management
activities; vegetation management; bridge and drainage structure
maintenance; in-water recurring maintenance activities; and irrigation
and drainage canal activities (Western Canal Water District, Biggs West
Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, and Richvale Irrigation
District).
2. Activities Outside UPAs are areas of the County within the BRCP
Plan Area and located outside of the UPAs. Covered activities include
linear utilities, transportation construction and maintenance projects,
and agricultural support services projects. Outside UPAs do not include
areas that become part of BRCP conservation lands.
a. Permanent Development: covered activities of outside UPAs
include new construction and improvements to existing facilities,
including the following types of activities: waste management and
wastewater facilities; rerouting of canals (Western Canal Water
District, Biggs West Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, and
Richvale Irrigation District); transportation facilities construction;
BCAG Regional Transportation Plan and Caltrans projects; County rural
bridge replacement projects; Butte County rural intersection
improvement projects; Butte County rural roadway improvement projects;
in-water permanent development projects; and agricultural services.
b. Recurring Maintenance covered activities of outside UPAs include
maintenance of existing and new facilities, including the following
types of activities: waste and wastewater management activities;
irrigation and drainage canal activities (Western Canal Water District,
Biggs West Gridley Water District, Butte Water District, and Richvale
Irrigation District); transportation facilities maintenance; flood
control and stormwater management activities; vegetation management;
in-water maintenance activities; and bridge and drainage structure
maintenance.
[[Page 72111]]
3. Conservation Lands include the system of conservation lands
established under the BRCP. It includes conservation actions
implemented by the BRCP on conservation lands, including the following
types of activities: habitat management; habitat restoration and
enhancement; habitat and species monitoring; directed studies; general
maintenance of conservation lands and facilities; avoidance and
minimization measures; and other species conservation measures.
Covered Species
Covered Species are those species addressed in the proposed BRCP
for which conservation actions will be implemented and for which the
Applicants will seek incidental take authorizations for a period of up
to 50 years. Proposed covered species include threatened and endangered
species listed under the Act, species listed under the California
Endangered Species Act (CESA), as well as currently unlisted species
that have the potential to become listed during the life of the BRCP.
The BRCP currently includes 39 listed and non-listed wildlife and plant
species.
The following federally listed threatened and endangered wildlife
species are proposed to be covered by the BRCP (``NMFS'' indicates
those species to be included only on the NMFS permit, and ``FWS''
indicates those species only to be included on the FWS permit): The
threatened Central Valley steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (NMFS),
endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha) (NMFS), threatened Central Valley spring-run Chinook
salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (NMFS), threatened green sturgeon
(Acipenser medirostris) (NMFS), threatened Valley elderberry longhorn
beetle (Desmocerus californicus dimorphus) (FWS), endangered vernal
pool tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) (FWS), endangered conservancy
fairy shrimp (Branchinecta conservatio) (FWS), threatened vernal pool
fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi) (FWS), and threatened giant garter
snake (Thamnophis gigas) (FWS).
The following non-listed wildlife species are proposed to be
covered by the BRCP (``NMFS'' indicates those species to be included on
the NMFS permit and ``FWS'' indicates those species to be included on
the FWS permit): tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) (FWS),
yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens) (FWS), bank swallow (Riparia
riparia) (FWS), Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea)
(FWS), western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis)
(FWS), greater sandhill crane (Grus canadensis tabida) (FWS),
California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) (FWS),
American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum) (FWS), Swainson's
hawk (Buteo swainsoni) (FWS), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
(FWS), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) (FWS), Blainville's horned
lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) (FWS), Western pond turtle (Actinemys
marmorata) (FWS), foothill yellow-legged frog (Rana boylii) (FWS),
Western spadefoot toad (Spea hammondii) (FWS), and Central Valley fall/
late fall-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) (NMFS).
Take of listed plant species is not prohibited on non-Federal land
under the Act, and cannot be authorized under a section 10 permit.
However, the applicants propose to include plant species in recognition
of the conservation benefits provided for them under an HCP. For the
purposes of the Plan, certain plant species are further included to
meet regulatory obligations under section 7 of the Act and the CESA.
All species included on an incidental take permit would receive
assurances under FWS's ``No Surprises'' regulations found in 50 CFR
17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5). The following federally listed plant
species are proposed to be included in the BRCP in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided for them under the BRCP and the
assurances permit holders would receive if they are included on FWS's
permit: the threatened Hoover's spurge (Chamaesyce hooveri), endangered
Butte County meadowfoam (Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica),
endangered hairy Orcutt grass (Orcuttia pilosa), threatened slender
Orcutt grass (Orcuttia tenuis), and endangered Greene's tuctoria
(Tuctoria greenei). The following unlisted plant species are also
proposed to be included in the BRCP: Ferris' milkvetch (Astragalus
tener var. ferrisiae), lesser saltscale (Atriplex minuscula), Ahart's
dwarf rush (Juncus leiospermus var. ahartii), Red Bluff dwarf rush
(Juncus leiospermus var. leiospermus), veiny monardella (Monardella
douglasii ssp. venosa), Ahart's paronychia (Paronychia ahartii),
California beaked-rush (Rhynchospora californica), Butte County
checkerbloom (Sidalcea robusta), and Butte County golden clover
(Trifolium jokerstii).
National Environmental Policy Act Compliance
FWS prepared the EIS, with NMFS, Corps, and EPA as cooperating
agencies. The EIS is the Federal portion of the Draft EIS/R, to analyze
the impacts of issuing incidental take permits based on the Draft Plan.
BCAG facilitated the preparation of the EIR portion of the Draft EIS/R,
in compliance with the CEQA, but all applicants share the CEQA lead
agency role. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife is a CEQA
Trustee and Responsible Agency. The Draft EIS/R was developed to inform
the public of the proposed action, alternatives, and associated
impacts; address public comments received during the scoping period for
the Draft EIS/R; and disclose irreversible commitments of resources.
The Draft EIS/R was developed to inform the public of the proposed
action, alternatives, and associated impacts; address public comments
received during the scoping period for the Draft EIS/R; and disclose
irreversible commitments of resources.
The proposed permit issuance triggers the need for compliance with
NEPA. FWS published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS/R in the
Federal Register on December 14, 2012 (77 FR 74500). The NOI announced
a public scoping period during which time the public was invited to
provide written comments and attend two public scoping meetings, which
were held on January 9, 2012, in Oroville and Chico, California.
The Service is now providing notice of the availability of the
Draft EIS/R, which evaluates the impacts of the Proposed Action
described above (i.e., issuance of the permits and implementation of
the Draft Plan), as well as the No-Action Alternative, a Reduced
Development/Reduced Fill Alternative, and a Greater Conservation
Alternative, which are described below.
No-Action Alternative
Under the No-Action Alternative, FWS and NMFS would not issue
incidental take permits to the Applicants, and the Draft Plan would not
be implemented. Under this alternative, projects that may adversely
affect federally listed species would require project-level
consultation with FWS and NMFS pursuant to section 7 or section 10 of
the Act. The applicants and others whose ongoing activities or future
actions have the potential for incidental take of State-listed species
in the plan area would apply for incidental take authorization under
CESA through a Section 2081(b) permit. Under the No Action Alternative,
there would be no comprehensive means to coordinate and standardize
mitigation and compensation requirements of the Act and CESA within the
Plan Area. This is
[[Page 72112]]
anticipated to result in a more costly, less equitable, less efficient
project review process that would reap fewer conservation benefits.
Conservation planning and implementation would not happen at a regional
scale and, therefore, would not establish a large interconnected system
of conservation lands to meet the needs of the species covered by the
BRCP.
Reduced Development/Reduced Fill Alternative
Under the Reduced Development/Reduced Fill Alternative, the reduced
development alternatives described in the applicants' general plan EIRs
were combined to create a single reduced development/reduced fill
footprint. Under the applicant's general plan alternatives, there would
be either a reduction in the development footprint for the respective
jurisdictions such that the development would be concentrated closer to
urban centers or a reduction in the total dwelling units and
commercial/industrial square footage such that less development would
occur. Covered activities under this alternative would be similar to
those described in the BRCP but would be limited to the reduced-
development footprint and to a permit term of 30 years. The
conservation strategy would be similar to that of the BRCP because it
would apply similar natural community acreage limitations. This
alternative would also reduce impacts on waters of the United States by
reducing the potential impacts on jurisdictional waters, including
wetlands, by reducing the amount of overall development anticipated to
occur within the Plan Area and by applying the acreage limitations to
jurisdictional waters as described in the BRCP. This also includes
reduced dredge or fill of jurisdictional waters of the United States,
including wetlands, by reducing or eliminating the types of covered
activities identified in the BRCP associated with bridges and
transportation projects. However, though the conservation measures (and
any activities undertaken by the water districts or irrigation
districts) would be the same as under the proposed action, there would
be an overall reduced amount and extent of conserved lands under this
alternative because less development would occur over a shorter time
period.
Greater Conservation Alternative
The Greater Conservation Alternative would increase the target
amount of certain natural community types to be conserved under the
conservation strategy. This alternative would maintain the same Plan
Area, covered species, covered activities, and conservation measures as
the Proposed Action Alternative, but would modify the proposed
conservation strategy to increase conservation of two land cover types:
grasslands and rice. The increase in these land cover types, as
compared to the Proposed Action, is expected to provide additional
habitat for certain covered species (e.g., Swainson's hawk, white-
tailed kite, and giant garter snake). This alternative would increase
grasslands conserved by 9,850 acres (an approximately 20 percent
increase) and increase rice conservation by 35,310 acres (an
approximately 90 percent increase) as compared to the proposed action.
The Greater Conservation Alternative would result in approximately
51,955 and up to 78,140 total acres of grasslands and rice
conservation, respectively.
EPA's Role in the EIS Process
The EPA is charged under section 309 of the Clean Air Act to review
all Federal agencies' EISs and to comment on the adequacy and the
acceptability of the environmental impacts of proposed actions in the
EISs.
EPA also serves as the repository (EIS database) for EISs prepared
by Federal agencies and provides notice of their availability in the
Federal Register. The EIS database provides information about EISs
prepared by Federal agencies, as well as EPA's comments concerning the
EISs. All EISs are filed with EPA, which publishes a notice of
availability on Fridays in the Federal Register.
For more information, see http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html. You may search for EPA comments on EISs, along with EISs
themselves, at https://cdxnodengn.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-public/action/eis/search.
Public Comments
We request data, comments, new information, or suggestions from the
public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific
community, Tribes, industry, or any other interested party on this
notice, the Draft EIS/R. and Draft Plan. We particularly seek comments
on the following:
1. Biological information concerning the species;
2. Relevant data concerning the species;
3. Additional information concerning the range, distribution,
population size, and population trends of the species;
4. Current or planned activities in the subject area and their
possible impacts on the species;
5. The presence of archeological sites, buildings and structures,
historic events, sacred and traditional areas, and other historic
preservation concerns, which are required to be considered in project
planning by the National Historic Preservation Act; and
6. Identification of any other environmental issues that should be
considered with regard to the proposed development and permit action.
You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods
listed in the ADDRESSES section. Comments and materials we receive will
be available for public inspection by appointment, during normal
business hours (Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) at the
Service's Sacramento address (see ADDRESSES).
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, or other personal
identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your
entire comment--including your personal identifying information--might
be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your
comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Next Steps
This notice is provided under section 10(a) of the Act and FWS
regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (40 CFR 1506.6). We will evaluate the applications, associated
documents, and comments submitted thereon to prepare a Final EIS/R.
Permit decisions will be made no sooner than 30 days after the
publication of the NOA of for the Final EIS/R and completion of the
Record of Decision.
Authority
We publish this notice under the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347 et seq.; NEPA), and its
implementing regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40
CFR parts 1500-1508, as well as in compliance with section 10(c) of the
Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531-1544 et seq.; Act).
[[Page 72113]]
Dated: November 6, 2015.
Alexandra Pitts,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Sacramento, California.
Dated: November 6, 2015.
Angela Somma,
Chief, Endangered Species Conservation Division, Office of Protected
Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2015-29447 Filed 11-17-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P