81 FR 91151 - Notice of Availability of the Draft Missouri River Recovery Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 242 (December 16, 2016)
Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 242 (December 16, 2016)
| Page Range | 91151-91154 | |
| FR Document | 2016-30294 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 242 (Friday, December 16, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 91151-91154] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-30294] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Notice of Availability of the Draft Missouri River Recovery Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Kansas City and Omaha Districts of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), have developed the Missouri River Recovery Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (MRRMP-EIS). This document is a programmatic assessment of (1) major federal actions necessary to avoid a finding of jeopardy to the pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus), interior least tern (Sterna antillarum athalassos), and the Northern Great Plains piping plover (Charadrius melodus) caused by operation of the Missouri River Mainstem and Kansas River Reservoir System and operation [[Page 91152]] and maintenance of the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project (BSNP) in accordance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended; and (2) the Missouri River BSNP fish and wildlife mitigation plan described in the 2003 Record of Decision (ROD) and authorized by the Water Resources Development Acts (WRDA) of 1986, 1999, and 2007. DATES: Submit written comments on the draft EIS on or before February 24, 2017. ADDRESSES: Send written comments to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, ATTN: CENWO-PM-AC--MRRMP-EIS, 1616 Capitol Ave, Omaha, NE 68102; or provide comments via an online comment form (preferred method) at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/MRRMP. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The above address or email to [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USACE is issuing this notice pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (43 CFR parts 1500 through 1508). This notice announces the availability of the draft MRRMP-EIS and begins the public comment period. The MRRMP-EIS, its appendices, and other supporting documents can be accessed at: www.moriverrecovery.org under the ``Management Plan'' tab on the Web site homepage. Background Information. The Missouri River flows for 2,341 miles from Three Forks, Montana at the confluence of the Gallatin, Madison, and Jefferson Rivers in the Rocky Mountains through the states of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri. It is the longest river in the United States. USACE operates the Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System (System) consisting of six dams and reservoirs with a capacity to store 72.4 million acre-feet (MAF) of water, the largest reservoir system in North America. The System is operated as an integrated system for eight congressionally authorized purposes, which include flood control, navigation, irrigation, hydropower, water supply, water quality, recreation, and fish and wildlife. USACE operates the System in accordance with the policies and procedures prescribed in the Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System Master Water Control Manual (Master Manual) (USACE, 2006a). The Kansas River Reservoir System includes the primary downstream flood control projects of Clinton, Perry, Tuttle Creek, Milford, Waconda (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation), Wilson, and Kanopolis. USACE also constructed and maintains the Missouri River Bank Stabilization and Navigation Project which provides a 9-foot deep navigation channel with a minimum width of 300 feet during the navigation season from April 1 to November 30 between Sioux City, Iowa, and the mouth near St. Louis, Missouri. The BSNP consists mainly of rock pile structures and revetments along the outsides of bends and transverse dikes along the insides of bends to force the river into a channel alignment that is self-maintaining or self-scouring. During the course of the Master Manual Review and Update Study, developed from 1989 to 2004, USACE entered into formal consultation with USFWS on the effects of the operation of the Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System, operation and maintenance of the BSNP, and operation of the Kansas River Reservoir System on the pallid sturgeon, interior least tern, and piping plover. A biological opinion (BiOp) was issued by USFWS in 2000 with a finding of jeopardy for all the listed species and a proposed Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) that was accepted by the USACE. In 2003, following additional consultation, USFWS provided an amended BiOp that determined the new proposed action by USACE would avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of the two listed bird species, but would continue to jeopardize the continued existence of the pallid sturgeon in the wild. The Missouri River Recovery Program (MRRP) was established in 2005 to implement the RPA requirements contained in the 2000 and 2003 BiOps and the BSNP fish and wildlife mitigation plan. A substantial amount of new knowledge about the species, their habitats, and management actions has been developed since the 2003 Amended BiOp was completed. The Independent Scientific Advisory Panel (ISAP), established by the Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee (MRRIC), issued a report in 2011 that recommended development of an overarching adaptive management (AM) plan that would anticipate implementation of combined flow management actions and mechanical habitat construction. They recommended an AM plan should be used to guide future management actions, monitoring, research, and assessment. The ISAP report also recommended basing the AM plan on an effects analysis, which would precede the development of the AM plan and incorporate new knowledge about the species accrued since the 2003 Amended BiOp. Since the 2011 report, the first phase of the effects analysis has been completed and documented for pallid sturgeon, interior least tern, piping plover, and associated habitat analyses. The purpose of this draft MRRMP-EIS is to develop a suite of actions that allows the USACE to meet its obligations under the Endangered Species Act while still operating its projects for the congressionally authorized purposes. Authorities used to meet this purpose may include existing USACE authorities related to Missouri River System operations for listed species and acquisition and development of land needed for creation of habitat for listed species provided by Section 601(a) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, as modified by Section 334(a) of WRDA 1999, and further modified by Section 3176 of WRDA 2007, although alternatives formulation was not limited to these authorities. The draft MRRMP-EIS assesses the programmatic effects of alternatives for implementing the MRRP, which include actions necessary to avoid a finding of jeopardy to the federally-listed species and associated actions which comply with the BSNP mitigation plan during the implementation timeframe for this EIS. This EIS provides the necessary information for the public to fully evaluate a range of alternatives to best meet the purpose and need of the MRRMP-EIS and to provide thoughtful and meaningful comment for the Agency's consideration. Six alternatives were carried forward from the Effects Analysis results for detailed evaluation in the MRRMP-EIS (the no- action alternative and five action alternatives). The following management actions were included in all six of the alternatives: --Mechanical construction of emergent sandbar habitat (ESH); --Vegetation management, predator management, and human restriction measures on ESH; --Pallid sturgeon propagation and augmentation; --Pallid early life stage habitat construction downstream of Ponca, Nebraska; --Habitat development and management of acquired lands; and --Monitoring and evaluation of management actions. However the actual scale and extent of mechanical ESH creation and pallid early life stage habitat construction would vary among the alternatives. [[Page 91153]] Under the no-action alternative, USACE would continue to implement the MRRP as it is currently. In addition to the actions common to all alternatives, the USACE would mechanically construct ESH at a rate of 107 acres per year in the Garrison and Gavins Point reaches and construct pallid early life stage habitat to achieve an average of 20 acres of shallow water habitat per river mile. The no-action alternative would also continue to implement the plenary spring pulse included in the Master Manual. Alternative 2 represents the USFWS's interpretation of the management actions that could be ultimately implemented as part of the 2003 Amended BiOp RPA. In addition to the actions common to all alternatives, the USACE would mechanically construct ESH at a rate up to 3,546 acres per year in the Garrison, Fort Randall, Lewis and Clark Lake, and Gavins Point reaches and pallid early life stage habitat to achieve an average of 30 acres of shallow water habitat per river mile. Alternative 2 would also include a spring pallid flow release consisting of a bimodal pulse in March and May and a low summer flow. Under Alternatives 3-6, the USACE would follow the processes and criteria in the AM plan (companion document to the MRRMP-EIS) that was developed based on the results of the Effects Analysis. The AM plan identifies the process and criteria to implement initial management actions, assess hypotheses, and introduce new management actions should they become necessary. Initial management actions include specific study efforts to fill data gaps in knowledge of the pallid sturgeon life cycle, creation of spawning habitat for pallid sturgeon to monitor effectiveness, and the construction of pallid early life stage habitat following the interception and rearing complex (IRC) concept identified in the Effects Analysis. In addition to the actions common to Alternatives 3-6, Alternative 3 would include mechanical construction of ESH at an average rate of 391 acres per year when construction is needed in the Garrison, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point reaches. Alternative 3 would not implement the plenary spring pulse included in the Master Manual. However, as part of the AM plan the potential for a one-time spawning cue test release, if studies during the first 9-10 years do not provide a clear answer on whether a spawning cue is important, is included in Alternative 3. In addition to the actions common to Alternatives 3-6, Alternative 4 would include mechanical construction of ESH at an average rate of 240 acres per year when construction is needed in the Garrison, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point reaches. Alternative 4 also includes implementation of a spring ESH creation release if System storage is at 42 MAF or greater on April 1, normal flows that could create 250 acres of ESH have not occurred in the previous four years, and downstream flow is below identified flood control constraints specific to this alternative. Alternative 4 also includes, as part of the AM plan, the potential for a one-time spawning cue release as described for Alternative 3. In addition to the actions common to Alternatives 3-6, Alternative 5 would include mechanical construction of ESH at an average rate of 309 acres per year when construction is needed in the Garrison, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point reaches. Alternative 5 also includes implementation of a fall ESH creation release if System storage is at 54.5 MAF or greater on October 17, normal flows that could create 250 acres of ESH have not occurred in the previous four years, and downstream flow is below identified flood control constraints specific to this alternative. Alternative 5, also includes, as part of the AM plan, the potential for a one-time spawning cue release as described for Alternative 3. In addition to the actions common to Alternatives 3-6, Alternative 6 would include mechanical construction of ESH at an average rate of 304 acres per year when construction is needed in the Garrison, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point reaches. Alternative 6 also includes implementation of a spawning cue release, attempted every 3 years, consisting of a bimodal pulse in March and May. These spawning cue releases would not be started or would be terminated whenever downstream flow is at identified flood control constraints specific to this alternative. The draft EIS evaluates the potential effects on the human environment associated with each of the above alternatives. Resources and uses evaluated include: River infrastructure and hydrological processes; pallid sturgeon; piping plover and interior least tern; fish and wildlife habitat; other special status species; water quality; air quality; cultural resources; land use and ownership; commercial sand and gravel dredging; flood risk management and interior drainage; hydropower; irrigation; navigation; recreation; thermal power; water supply; wastewater facilities; tribal interests (other); human health and safety; environmental justice; ecosystem services; and Mississippi River resources. Meetings. Six public meetings to share information and to allow the public to provide oral and written comments will be held from 5:00 p.m. to 8:45 p.m. on:Tuesday, February 7, 2017--Fort Peck Interpretive Center, Yellowstone Road, Fort Peck, Montana 59223. Wednesday, February 8, 2017--Bismarck State College, National Energy Center of Excellence, 1500 Edwards Ave., Bismarck, North Dakota 58506. Thursday, February 9, 2017--Ramkota Hotel and Conference Center, 920 W Sioux Avenue, Pierre, South Dakota 57501. Tuesday, February 14, 2017--Thompson Alumni Center, Bootstrapper Hall, 6705 Dodge Street, Omaha, Nebraska 68612. Wednesday, February 15, 2017--Hilton Kansas City Airport, Shawnee B, 8801 NW 112th Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64153. Thursday, February 16, 2017--Double Tree Inn by Hilton Hotel, Ballroom A & B, 16625 Swingley Ridge Road, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017. Each public meeting will begin with an open house at 5:00 p.m. A formal presentation will be provided at 5:45 p.m. followed by a public hearing session. Several different methods of submitting comments will be available at each public meeting. The public meeting dates or locations may change based on inclement weather or exceptional circumstances. If the meeting date or location is changed, the USACE will issue a press release and post it on www.moriverrecovery.org to announce the updated meeting details. Schedule. Public comments on the draft MRRMP-EIS must be received by February 24, 2017. The USACE will consider and respond to all comments received on the draft MRRMP-EIS when preparing the final MRRMP-EIS. The USACE expects to issue the final EIS in the spring of 2018, at which time a Notice of Availability will be published in the Federal Register. A Record of Decision is expected in the spring of 2018. Special Assistance for Public Meeting. The meeting facilities are physically accessible to people with disabilities. People needing special assistance to attend and/or participate in the meetings should contact: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District, ATTN: CENWO-PM- AC, 1616 Capitol Ave., Omaha, NE 68102 or email [email protected]. To allow sufficient time to process special requests, please contact no later than one week before the public meeting. Public Disclosure Statement. If you wish to comment, you may mail your comments as indicated under the [[Page 91154]] ADDRESSES section of this notice. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or any other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying information--may be made available to the public at any time. While you can request us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: December 8, 2016. Mark Harberg, Missouri River Recovery Program Manager, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. [FR Doc. 2016-30294 Filed 12-15-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2016 / Notices 91151
3. Identify and evaluate practicable provided, consider initial as their understanding of EO 11988 and
alternatives to locating in the base implementation experience to identify EO 13690. When comments are being
floodplain, including alternative sites any necessary clarifications or changes, made on specific sections of the
outside of the floodplain. and incorporate any changes introduced document, USACE requests that
4. Identify impacts of the proposed by the reassessment of the FFRMS commenters identify the relevant page
action. required by EO 13690. After two years, and line numbers to which the comment
5. If impacts cannot be avoided, the EC will either be revised and applies.
develop measures to minimize the reissued or converted to an ER, which All comments, literature citations,
impacts and restore and preserve the does not expire and is more permanent experiential references, data, other
floodplain, as appropriate. agency guidance. relevant reports, and input in response
6. Reevaluate alternatives. The draft EC is intended to provide to the guiding topics and issues are
7. Present the findings and a public overarching guidance to all USACE being accepted through email, or
explanation. Civil Works mission areas. As such, it through the postal service. All
8. Implement the action. does not provide extensive detail about comments submitted by the date
Following issuance of EO 11988 and how the requirements will be identified above will be compiled and
the corresponding interagency implemented within specific program sent to the PDT for their consideration.
Implementing Guidelines, USACE areas or activities; instead it establishes
developed Engineering Regulation (ER) intended implementation principles Future Actions
1165–2–26 for interpreting and that will be clarified in greater detail in Feedback and comments provided in
implementing the requirements of EO individual program specific guidance response to this notice will be
11988. The regulation applies to all field documents, to be developed or revised considered and the draft EC will be
operating activities having Civil Works at a later date. Generally, the new updated as appropriate. When the final
responsibilities, with the exception of requirements will be incorporated into EC is published, a notice will be placed
the Regulatory Program which specific guidance documents as they are in the Federal Register and on the
implements EO 11988 through its updated through the agency’s regular USACE EO 13690 Implementation Web
regulations. Section 14 of ER 1165–2–26 process and schedule, unless a new site, and the document itself will be
explains how EO 11988 applies to guidance document needs to be made available through the USACE
specific Civil Works programs. prepared to address some aspect of publications Web site (http://
On January 30, 2015, the White House implementation of the requirements. www.publications.usace.army.mil/).
issued Executive Order 13690— USACE now invites review and
Dated: December 12, 2016.
Establishing a Federal Flood Risk comment from our partners and
Management Standard and a Process for Karen Durham-Aguilera,
stakeholders on the proposed
Further Soliciting and Considering implementation guidance contained Director of Contingency, Operations and
Public Input. EO 13690 and the Federal within the draft EC. Homeland Security.
Flood Risk Management Standard [FR Doc. 2016–30240 Filed 12–15–16; 8:45 am]
(FFRMS), implemented through Instructions for Providing Comments BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
guidelines established by the Water Online
Resources Council (‘‘Implementing USACE is requesting assistance in the
Guidelines’’), updated EO 11988 to form of data, comments, literature DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
include the following: references, or field experiences, to help
• Requires the use of an expanded clarify the policy requirements for Department of the Army, U.S. Army
floodplain for some actions that are implementing EO 11988 and EO 13690 Corps of Engineers
federal investments. for agency activities. The draft EC is
Notice of Availability of the Draft
• Requires that the elevation and available for review on the USACE EO
Missouri River Recovery Management
horizontal extent of the expanded 13690 Implementation Web site (http://
Plan and Environmental Impact
floodplain be determined using one of www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Missions/
Statement
three approaches: The climate-informed FloodRiskManagement/
science approach, the freeboard value FloodRiskManagementProgram/ AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S.
approach, and the 500-year flood AbouttheProgram/PolicyandGuidance/ Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
elevation approach. FederalFloodRiskManagement ACTION: Notice.
• Requires agencies to use natural Standard.aspx). An Executive Summary
and nature based approaches, where of the draft EC is also available on the SUMMARY: The Kansas City and Omaha
possible. Web site to provide a high-level Districts of the U.S. Army Corps of
• Establishes higher standards for overview of the document and summary Engineers (USACE), in cooperation with
critical actions. of the more substantial changes since the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
USACE established a Product the original 1984 ER. Additionally, a list (USFWS), have developed the Missouri
Development Team (PDT) to investigate of topics and issues for which feedback River Recovery Management Plan and
what impacts EO 13690 and the FFRMS would be especially helpful is posted Environmental Impact Statement
would have on its policies and programs for reviewer’s consideration. While (MRRMP–EIS). This document is a
and, in particular, to develop revised USACE welcomes any and all feedback programmatic assessment of (1) major
implementation guidance for EO 11988, on the draft EC, feedback responding to federal actions necessary to avoid a
as amended. A draft Engineer Circular the list of identified topics and issues finding of jeopardy to the pallid
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
(EC) that will ultimately rescind ER will be particularly helpful to USACE in sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus),
1165–2–26 has been developed to clarifying areas requiring new policy or interior least tern (Sterna antillarum
provide overarching guidance for the practice. The most useful comments are athalassos), and the Northern Great
implementation of EO 11988, as from specific experiences and case Plains piping plover (Charadrius
amended. The EC will expire two years examples. Commenters should use their melodus) caused by operation of the
from issuance, which will provide knowledge of working with USACE on Missouri River Mainstem and Kansas
USACE time to evaluate the guidance various types of federal actions as well River Reservoir System and operation
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Dec 15, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16DEN1.SGM 16DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_91393/page/1.svg)
![91154 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2016 / Notices
ADDRESSES section of this notice. Before Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam and Lake total of 705 mgd to a range of 597–621
including your address, phone number, Seminole. mgd—242 mgd from Lake Lanier
email address, or any other personal The purpose and need for the federal (instead of 297 mgd) and 355–379 mgd
identifying information in your action is to determine how federal downstream (instead of 408 mgd)—
comment, you should be aware that projects in the ACF Basin should be through the year 2050 rather than 2040
your entire comment—including your operated for their authorized purposes, as specified in the 2013 request.
personal identifying information—may in light of current conditions and USACE’s objectives for the Master
be made available to the public at any applicable law, and to implement those Manual are to develop a water control
time. While you can request us to operations through updated water plan that meets the existing water
withhold your personal identifying control plans and manuals. The resource needs of the basin, fulfills its
information from public review, we proposed action will result in an responsibilities in operating for the
cannot guarantee that we will be able to updated Master Manual and individual authorized project purposes, and
do so. project water control manuals (WCMs) complies with all pertinent laws. The
Dated: December 8, 2016. that comply with existing USACE FEIS presents the results of USACE’s
regulations and reflect operations under analysis of the environmental effects of
Mark Harberg,
existing congressional authorizations, the Proposed Action Alternative (PAA)
Missouri River Recovery Program Manager,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
taking into account changes in basin that the USACE believes accomplishes
hydrology and demands from years of these objectives.
[FR Doc. 2016–30294 Filed 12–15–16; 8:45 am]
growth and development, new/ USACE evaluated an array of
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P potential water management alternatives
rehabilitated structural features, legal
developments, and environmental and optional water supply amounts
issues. The action includes updates to during the Master Manual update
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE process, resulting in the selection of the
account for a June 28, 2011, decision of
Department of the Army; Corps of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. PAA. Additional information on the
Engineers On May 16, 2000, the Governor of the components of the PAA can be found at
State of Georgia submitted a formal http://www.sam.usace.army.mil/
Notice of Availability—Final request to the Assistant Secretary of the Missions/PlanningEnvironmental/
Environmental Impact Statement for Army (Civil Works) to adjust the ACFMasterWaterControlManualUpdate/
the Update of the Water Control operation of Lake Lanier, and to enter ACFDocumentLibrary.aspx.
Manuals and Water Supply Storage into agreements with the state or water One alternative available to USACE is
Assessment for the Apalachicola- supply providers to accommodate to continue with current operations.
Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin increases in water supply withdrawals This approach is termed the No Action
from Lake Lanier and downstream at Alternative (NAA). The PAA would
AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Atlanta over the next 30 years, update the water control plans and
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. culminating in total gross withdrawals manuals for the ACF Basin as directed
ACTION: Notice of availability. of 705 million gallons per day (mgd)— by Secretary of the Army Pete Geren on
297 mgd from Lake Lanier and 408 mgd January 30, 2008. Additionally, the PAA
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
downstream—by the year 2030. The would provide for releases from Buford
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Dam to satisfy Georgia’s 2015 request of
Mobile District (USACE), has released
Works) in 2002 denied Georgia’s 379 mgd from the Chattahoochee River
the Final Environmental Impact
request. The 2011 decision of the 11th for Metro Atlanta and would reallocate
Statement (FEIS) for the update of the
Circuit Court of Appeals ordered storage in Lake Lanier of 252,950 acre-
Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint feet to satisfy Georgia’s 2015 request and
USACE to reconsider whether it has the
(ACF) Water Control Master Manual support average annual water supply
legal authority to operate the Buford
(Master Manual) Alabama, Florida, and withdrawals of up to 222 mgd.
project to accommodate Georgia’s
Georgia including a water supply The FEIS responds to, and
request. USACE provided a legal
storage assessment addressing incorporates agency and public
opinion concluding that it has sufficient
reallocation of storage in Lake Sidney comments received on the DEIS, which
authority under applicable law to
Lanier (Lake Lanier). was available for public review from
accommodate that request, but noted
A Notice of Availability was October 2, 2015, through January 15,
that any decision to take action on
published by the Environmental 2016. Five open house style public
Georgia’s request would require a
Protection Agency on December 16, meetings were held on October 26th
separate analysis. On January 11, 2013,
2016. The review period will end 30 through November 9th, 2015, and more
the Governor of the state of Georgia
days after that date. than 300 persons attended these
provided updated demographic and
DATES: The review period of the FEIS water demand data to confirm the workshops, either representing various
ends on January 14, 2017. continued need for 705 mgd to meet agencies and organizations or as
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Georgia’s water needs from Lake Lanier interested individual citizens. Two
Lewis Sumner at telephone (251) 694– and the Chattahoochee River to hundred seventy (270) comments on the
3857. approximately the year 2040 rather than DEIS were submitted by agencies
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 2030 as specified in the 2000 request. (Federal, state, and local), private
Master Manual includes appendices On December 4, 2015, after the Draft organizations, and individuals. The
prepared for individual projects in the Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) USACE responses to substantive agency
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
ACF Basin and is the guide used by had been published, the Georgia and public comments are provided in
USACE to operate a system of five Environmental Protection Division appendix C of the FEIS.
federal reservoir projects in the basin— (GAEPD), on behalf of the State of USACE incorporated pertinent
Buford Dam and Lake Lanier, West Georgia, provided additional updated revisions and updates to the EIS and the
Point Dam and Lake, Walter F. George demographic and water demand data WCM based on input received during
Lock and Dam and Lake, George W. (referred to as Georgia’s 2015 request) the public review process. The key
Andrews Lock and Dam and Lake, and that reduced the state’s needs from a revisions and updates to the documents
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:42 Dec 15, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\16DEN1.SGM 16DEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_91393/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-14 09:07:15
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 09:07:15
| 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 | Submit written comments on the draft EIS on or before February 24, 2017. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 91151 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR