80 FR 77016 - Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement, Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project, El Dorado County, California
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 238 (December 11, 2015)
Bureau of Reclamation
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 238 (December 11, 2015)
| Page Range | 77016-77018 | |
| FR Document | 2015-31230 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 238 (Friday, December 11, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 77016-77018] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-31230] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation [RR02015200, XXXR0680R1, RR.17520306.0000006] Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Statement, Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project, El Dorado County, California AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation, the California Tahoe Conservancy (Conservancy), and the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency have prepared the final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS/EIS) for the Upper Truckee River and Marsh Restoration Project (Project). The purpose of the Project is to restore natural geomorphic processes and improve ecological functions and values in this lowest reach of the Upper Truckee River and the surrounding marsh and help reduce the river's discharge of nutrients and sediment that diminish Lake Tahoe's clarity. DATES: Reclamation will not make a decision on the proposed action until at least 30 days after the release of the final EIR/EIS/EIS. After the 30-day waiting period, Reclamation will complete a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD will state the action that will be implemented and will discuss all factors leading to the decision. ADDRESSES: Send written correspondence or requests for the document to Scott Carroll, [[Page 77017]] Environmental Planner, State of California, California Tahoe Conservancy, 1061 Third Street, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150; by fax to (530) 542-5567; or by email to [email protected]. The final EIR/EIS/EIS is accessible at the following Web sites:http://tahoe.ca.gov/upper-truckee-marsh-69.aspx. http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=2937. To request a compact disc of the final EIR/EIS/EIS, please contact Mr. Carroll as indicated above, or call (530) 543-6062. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for locations where paper copies of the final EIR/EIS/EIS are available for public review. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Carroll, California Tahoe Conservancy, at [email protected], or (530) 543-6062; or Shannon Friedman, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, at [email protected]., or (775) 589-5205; and Rosemary Stefani, Bureau of Reclamation, at (916) 978-5045, or [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The approximately 592-acre project area is along the most downstream reaches of the Upper Truckee River and Trout Creek, including their mouths at Lake Tahoe in the City of South Lake Tahoe, within El Dorado County, California. It includes 1.8-miles of the Upper Truckee River as well as the marsh and meadows surrounding the lowest reaches of Trout Creek. The majority of the project area is owned by the Conservancy though the Project does include small areas owned by other public agencies and private landowners. Four action alternatives (Alternatives 1-4), and the No-Project/No- Action Alternative (Alternative 5), were analyzed in the draft EIR/EIS/ EIS. None of the alternatives evaluated in the draft EIR/EIS/EIS were designated as preferred. Rather, guiding principles were developed requiring that each alternative be designed as a ``full-spectrum'' alternative that addressed, to varying degrees, all project objectives and design directives; be modular in nature, such that recreation access and infrastructure components could be interchangeable with habitat restoration and protection measures proposed; and embody a diverse range of feasible and implementable concepts, consistent with constraints identified and mapped early in the planning process. After input from responsible and interested agencies, and public comments provided on the draft EIR/EIS/EIS, and through additional outreach efforts, the lead agencies used a qualitative system to weigh the pros and cons of the alternatives to develop the Preferred Alternative described following the action alternatives below. Alternative 1 would involve restoration of the Upper Truckee River by increasing channel length and decreasing channel capacity. Alternative 1 includes maximum recreation access and infrastructure on the perimeter of the marsh, including a bridge and board walk. Alternative 2 would involve river restoration by directly raising the streambed elevation, increasing the channel length, and decreasing channel capacity. A key element of this alternative's restoration component would be the excavation of a new river channel that has less capacity than the existing channel. Alternative 2 includes a minimum recreation access and infrastructure design approach, focusing primarily on habitat protection features. Alternative 3 would promote the development, through natural processes, of a new main channel and/ or distributary channels in the central portion of the project area. A ``pilot'' channel would be constructed from the existing river channel to historical channels in the center of the project area, but no construction would occur in the central or northern portions of the project area. Rather, natural processes would be allowed to dictate the flow path(s), bed and bank elevations, and capacities of the channel(s) through the central and northern portions of the project area. Alternative 3 would include a moderate level of recreation access and infrastructure, including more signage, more trail development, and viewpoints than proposed under Alternative 2 but less than Alternative 1. Alternative 4 would restore the river channel and its connection to the floodplain by lowering bank heights by excavating an inset floodplain along much of the river channel, and by localized cut and fill to create meanders in the existing straightened reach. Alternative 4 would include a similar level of recreation infrastructure as Alternative 3. Alternative 5 would not provide any actions to restore the river channel and its connection to the floodplain or recreation features beyond maintaining existing infrastructure in the project area. This alternative would allow, but not facilitate the long-term, passive recovery of the river system via natural processes. This alternative represents a projection of reasonably foreseeable future conditions that could occur if no project actions were implemented. The Preferred Alternative includes the most beneficial and cost- effective elements of the five alternatives evaluated in the draft EIR/ EIS/EIS. This alternative is also the most feasible, the most highly responsive to public comments, and the most resilient to the potential impacts of climate change. It includes the following components: Alternative 3 restoration elements which involve construction of a small pilot channel that would reconnect the Upper Truckee River to the middle of the marsh to attain ecosystem and water quality improvements. This concept proposes the most geomorphically appropriate channel configuration allowing the pilot channel to strategically connect the current river alignment to historic channels and lagoons. The river would form its own pattern and spread over the expanse of the marsh, resulting in substantial benefits to habitats, wildlife, and water quality. The abandoned sections of existing river channel would be largely filled to create restored meadow and expanded wetlands. Alternative 5 for recreation elements on the east side of the Upper Truckee Marsh that would maintain the current dispersed recreation experience. No new recreation infrastructure would be installed and public access would be afforded through the current informal user-created trail system. The Conservancy would continue to manage and reduce the impacts of recreational use and new trails while providing on-site signage. Alternative 3 recreation elements for the west side of the Upper Truckee Marsh would upgrade the recreation infrastructure through construction of ADA-accessible trails to Lake Tahoe and formalized viewpoints that provide interpretive and site-information signage. The developed recreation experience would be maintained consistent with natural resource values. Previously proposed only under Alternatives 1 and 2, the Preferred Alternative would also include the restoration of sand ridges (``dunes'') at Cove East Beach that were graded and leveled as part of the Tahoe Keys development and the removal of fill at the east end of Barton Beach to create a restored lagoon. The detailed description of the Preferred Alternative, the selection process, and a summary of Alternatives 1 through 5 are presented in Chapter 2 of the final EIR/EIS/EIS. A Notice of Availability of the draft EIR/EIS/EIS was published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2013 (78 FR 13082). The comment period on the draft EIR/EIS/EIS ended on April 29, 2013. The final EIR/ EIS/EIS contains responses to all comments received and [[Page 77018]] reflects comments and any additional information received during the review period. Copies of the final EIR/EIS/EIS are available for public review at the following locations: State of California, California Tahoe Conservancy, 1061 Third Street, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency front desk, 128 Market Street, Stateline, NV 89449. Mid-Pacific Regional Library, Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825. Public Disclosure Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in any correspondence, you should be aware that your entire correspondence--including your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you may ask us in your correspondence to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: November 20, 2015. Jason R. Phillips, Deputy Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region. [FR Doc. 2015-31230 Filed 12-10-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4332-90-P-P
![77016 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 238 / Friday, December 11, 2015 / Notices
RESPONDENTS’ ESTIMATED ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS—Continued
Average
number of Annual burden
30 CFR part 1210 Reporting and recordkeeping requirement Hour burden annual hours
responses
(lines of data)
(b) Period for keeping records. Lessees, operators, revenue
payors, or other persons required to keep records under this
section shall maintain and preserve them for 6 years from
the day on which the relevant transaction recorded occurred
unless the Secretary notifies the record holder of an audit or
investigation involving the records and that they must be
maintained for a longer period * * *.
[In accordance with 30 U.S.C. 1724(f), Federal oil and gas
records must be maintained for 7 years from the date the ob-
ligation became due.].
Total for Royalty ...................................................................................................... ................................ 10,499,998 337,933
and Production
Reporting.
* Note: ONRR considers each line of data as one response/report.
Estimated Annual Reporting and notice in the Federal Register on May DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-hour’’ Cost 15, 2015 (80 FR 28003), announcing that
Burden: we would submit this ICR to OMB for Bureau of Reclamation
We have identified non-hour costs for approval. The notice provided the [RR02015200, XXXR0680R1,
this collection of information for the required 60-day comment period. We RR.17520306.0000006]
implementation of system changes and received no comments in response to
new setups in the accounting system. the notice. Notice of Availability of the Final
Based on information provided by Environmental Impact Report/
If you wish to comment in response
participants, we estimate that the Environmental Impact Statement/
to this notice, you may send your
average total non-hour cost for each Environmental Impact Statement,
comments to the offices listed under the
participant is approximately $7,200. ADDRESSES section of this notice. The
Upper Truckee River and Marsh
Since there are an estimated 3,870 OMB has up to 60 days to approve or Restoration Project, El Dorado County,
respondents, the total estimated non- disapprove the information collection California
hour costs are $27,864,000 ($7,200 × but may respond after 30 days.
3,870 = $27,864,000). This equates to an AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation,
Therefore, to ensure maximum Interior.
annual non-hour cost of $9,288,000 for consideration, OMB should receive
this ICR renewal. It is important to note ACTION: Notice.
public comments by January 11, 2016.
that these are one-time costs due to the SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation,
regulation changes implemented in May Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) provides that an the California Tahoe Conservancy
of 2015 and are not expected to (Conservancy), and the Tahoe Regional
continue past this ICR renewal period. agency may not conduct or sponsor—
and a person is not required to respond Planning Agency have prepared the
III. Request for Comments to—a collection of information unless it final Environmental Impact Report/
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA displays a currently valid OMB control Environmental Impact Statement/
requires each agency to ‘‘* * * publish number. Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/
a 60-day notice in the Federal Register EIS/EIS) for the Upper Truckee River
Public Comment Policy: ONRR will and Marsh Restoration Project (Project).
* * * and otherwise consult with post all comments, including names and
members of the public and affected The purpose of the Project is to restore
addresses of respondents at http:// natural geomorphic processes and
agencies concerning each proposed www.regulations.gov. Before including
collection of information * * *.’’ improve ecological functions and values
Personally Identifiable Information (PII), in this lowest reach of the Upper
Agencies must specifically solicit such as your address, phone number,
comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the Truckee River and the surrounding
email address, or other personal marsh and help reduce the river’s
proposed collection of information is information in your comment(s), you
necessary for the agency to perform its discharge of nutrients and sediment that
should be aware that your entire diminish Lake Tahoe’s clarity.
duties, including whether the comment (including PII) may be made
information is useful; (b) evaluate the DATES: Reclamation will not make a
available to the public at any time.
accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the decision on the proposed action until at
While you may ask us in your comment
burden of the proposed collection of least 30 days after the release of the final
to withhold PII from public view, we
information; (c) enhance the quality, EIR/EIS/EIS. After the 30-day waiting
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
period, Reclamation will complete a
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
usefulness, and clarity of the do so.
information to be collected; and (d) Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD will
Dated: November 24, 2015. state the action that will be
minimize the burden on the
respondents, including the use of Gregory J. Gould, implemented and will discuss all factors
automated collection techniques or Director, Office of Natural Resources leading to the decision.
other forms of information technology. Revenue. ADDRESSES: Send written
To comply with the public [FR Doc. 2015–31289 Filed 12–10–15; 8:45 am] correspondence or requests for the
consultation process, we published a BILLING CODE 4335–30–P document to Scott Carroll,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:51 Dec 10, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM 11DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_77254/page/1.svg)
![77018 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 238 / Friday, December 11, 2015 / Notices
reflects comments and any additional publication of this Notice in the Federal mining in the area would be
information received during the review Register. incompatible with existing state or local
period. ADDRESSES: Comments may be land use plans or programs. SMCRA
Copies of the final EIR/EIS/EIS are submitted using any of the following 522(a)(3)(A), 30 U.S.C. 1272(a)(3)(A). In
available for public review at the methods: primary allegation 2, the petitioner
following locations: Electronic Comments: http:// contends that the OSMRE should
• State of California, California Tahoe www.osmre.gov/programs/rcm/ designate the petition area as unsuitable
Conservancy, 1061 Third Street, South TNLUM.shtm. Please follow the online for surface coal mining operations
Lake Tahoe, CA 96150. instructions for submitting comments. because such operations would affect
• Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Mail/Hand-Delivery/Courier: Earl D. fragile or historic lands, resulting in
front desk, 128 Market Street, Stateline, Bandy Jr., Director—Knoxville Field significant damage to important historic,
NV 89449. Office, Office of Surface Mining cultural, scientific, and aesthetic values
• Mid-Pacific Regional Library, Reclamation and Enforcement, John J. and natural systems. SMCRA
Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Duncan Federal Building, 710 Locust 522(a)(3)(B), 30 U.S.C. 1272(a)(3)(B).
Way, Sacramento, CA 95825. Street, 2nd Floor Knoxville, Tennessee The Director, OSMRE, is required to
Public Disclosure 37902. make a decision on the petition. The
Before including your address, phone You may review the draft PED/EIS draft EIS currently considers in detail
number, email address, or other online at http://www.osmre.gov/ the following alternatives for action by
personal identifying information in any programs/rcm/TNLUM.shtm. You also the Secretary:
correspondence, you should be aware may review these documents in person —Alternative 1—do not designate any of
that your entire correspondence— at the location listed below. the petition area as unsuitable for
including your personal identifying FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earl surface coal mining operations (no-
information—may be made publicly D. Bandy Jr., Director—Knoxville Field action). There would be no change in
available at any time. While you may Office, Office of Surface Mining types of permits applications accepted
ask us in your correspondence to Reclamation and Enforcement, John J. for evaluation.
withhold your personal identifying Duncan Federal Building, 710 Locust —Alternative 2—designate the entire
information from public review, we Street, 2nd Floor, Knoxville, Tennessee petition area (67,326 acres) as
cannot guarantee that we will be able to 37902. Telephone: 865–545–4103. unsuitable for all surface coal mining
do so. Email: TNLUM@OSMRE.gov. operations (State’s proposed action).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: No types of surface mining permits
Dated: November 20, 2015.
Jason R. Phillips, Background applications would be accepted for
this area.
Deputy Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region. On September 30, 2010, pursuant to —Alternative 3—designate the state
[FR Doc. 2015–31230 Filed 12–10–15; 8:45 am] section 522 of the Surface Mining petition area (67,326 acres) while
BILLING CODE 4332–90–P–P Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), allowing remining and road access
30 U.S.C. 1272(c), the State of (agency’s preferred alternative). The
Tennessee filed a petition with OSMRE only acceptable types of permits
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR to designate certain lands in the state as would be permits for remining.
unsuitable for surface coal mining —Alternative 4—grant an expanded
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
operations. These lands include the area corridor designation of
and Enforcement
within 600 feet of all ridge lines (a 1,200 independently-identified ridgelines
[S1D1S SS08011000 SX064A000 foot corridor) lying within the North within the petition area (76,133 acres)
167S180110; S2D2S SS08011000 Cumberland Wildlife Management Area
SX064A000 16XS501520] while allowing remining and road
(NCWMA)—made up of the Royal Blue access. The only acceptable types of
Wildlife Management Area, the permits would be permits for
North Cumberland Wildlife Sundquist Wildlife Management Area,
Management Area, Tennessee Lands remining.
and the New River Wildlife
Unsuitable for Mining Draft Petition —Alternative 5—designate lands based
Management Area (also known as the
Evaluation Document and on the presence of certain sensitive
Brimstone Tract Conservation
Environmental Impact Statement OSM– resources (12,331 acres). No types of
Easement)—and the Emory River Tracts
EIS–37 surface mining permits would be
Conservation Easement (ERTCE). The
accepted for this area.
AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining area under consideration for designation
encompasses in total approximately —Alternative 6—designate a reduced
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
67,326 acres along 505 miles of corridor of 600 feet (39,106 acres). No
ACTION: Notice of availability.
ridgelines. In accordance with its types of surface mining permits
SUMMARY: The Office of Surface Mining responsibility to administer the federal applications would be accepted for
Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) coal program in Tennessee, OSMRE this area.
announces that the draft Petition must process and make decisions on all In accordance with the applicable
Evaluation Document and petitions submitted to designate areas in regulations under 30 CFR parts 762 and
Environmental Impact Statement (PED/ the state as unsuitable for surface coal 764 and the requirements of the
EIS) for the North Cumberland Wildlife mining operations. National Environmental Policy Act of
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Management Area Petition to Find The petition includes two primary 1969 (NEPA), as amended, OSMRE
Certain Lands Unsuitable for Surface allegations with numerous allegations of evaluated the merits of the unsuitability
Coal Mining Operations is available for fact and supporting statements. In petition and analyzed the impacts of
public review and comment. primary allegation 1, the petitioner these alternatives. This analysis is
DATES: Electronic or written comments: contends that the petition area should reflected in the draft PED/EIS.
OSMRE will accept electronic or written be designated unsuitable for surface coal OSMRE has identified Alternative 3
comments within 45 days of the mining operations because surface coal as its preferred alternative.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:55 Dec 10, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\11DEN1.SGM 11DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_77254/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-03-02 09:13:48
Document Modified: 2018-03-02 09:13:48
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | Reclamation will not make a decision on the proposed action until at least 30 days after the release of the final EIR/EIS/EIS. After the 30-day waiting period, Reclamation will complete a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD will state the action that will be implemented and will discuss all factors leading to the decision. | |
| Contact | Scott Carroll, California Tahoe Conservancy, at [email protected], or (530) 543-6062; or Shannon Friedman, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, at [email protected], or (775) 589-5205; and Rosemary Stefani, Bureau of Reclamation, at (916) 978-5045, or [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 77016 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR