Finding of No Significant Impact for Silt Salinity Control Project, Garfield County, CO, 69732-69733 [05-22809]

Download as PDF 69732 Notices Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 221 Thursday, November 17, 2005 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency statements of organization and functions are examples of documents appearing in this section. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Glenn/Colusa County Resource Advisory Committee Forest Service, USDA. Notice of Meeting. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Glenn/Colusa County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet in Willows, California. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) Introductions, (2) approval of minutes, (3) public comment, (4) project proposals/possible action, (5) Web site update, (6) general discussion, (7) next agenda. DATES: The meeting will be held on November 28, 2005, from 1:30 p.m. and end at approximately 4:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Mendocino National Forest Supervisor’s Office, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988. Individuals wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and proposals to Jim Giachino, DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bobbin Gaddini, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino National Forest, Grindstone Ranger District, P.O. Box 164, Elk Creek, CA 95939. (530) 968–1815; e-mail ggaddini@fs.fed.us. The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Committee any file written statements with the Committee staff before or after the meeting. Public input sessions will be provided and individuals who made written requests by November 25, 2005 will have the opportunity to address the committee at those sessions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 BILLING CODE 3410–11–M DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Natural Resource Conservation Service Finding of No Significant Impact for Silt Salinity Control Project, Garfield County, CO Forest Service ACTION: Dated: November 9, 2005. James F. Giachino, Designated Federal Official. [FR Doc. 05–22793 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] Introduction The plan/environmental assessment was developed under the authority of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936. Funding for implementation is expected to be provided under the Federal Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, Public Law 104–127, as amended; Food Security Act of 1985, Subtitle D, Title XII, 16 U.S.C. 3830 et seq. An environmental evaluation was undertaken in conjunction with the development of the watershed plan. This evaluation was conducted in consultation with local, State and Federal agencies as well as with interested organizations and individuals. Copies of the Plan/ Environmental may be obtained by contacting Allen Green, Colorado State Conservationist at the following address. Data developed during the environmental evaluation is available for public review at the following location as well: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service, 655 Parfet St., Lakewood, Colorado 80215–5517. Background The Silt unit was not identified by name in Title II of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act, but was identified by USDA as an area which should be studied for possible salinity control. The combined environmental assessment has three major components: (1) To determine the contribution of salt loading from the irrigated farmland; (2) to determine the opportunity for USDA to reduce salt loading through improvements in irrigation delivery and application systems; (3) to determine environmental effects of the proposed action. PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Approximately 7,430 acres can be irrigated in the Silt Unit by five irrigation ditches. One of the aspects of the environmental evaluation involved inventorying and analyzing current irrigation systems and management practices. Data was analyzed on the five irrigation ditch systems. Each of the systems was analyzed to determine what types of improvements are needed. The remaining ditches were not studied because they are small or no longer in use. The Wasatch Formation, a claystone shale marine formation with a very high salt content, underlies much of the valley and is the principal source of salt contributed to the Colorado River. Lenses of crystaline salt often are exposed during excavation into shale. Because of the arid climate, salts have not been leached naturally and applying excess irrigation water to the soil greatly accelerates the leaching process. The Silt Unit contributes approximately 24,700 tons of salt annually to the Colorado River based on the 17-year USGS record of volume and concentration of outflow, minus volume and concentration of inflow. The 17year record spans a good representation of dry and wet years. Approximately 14,030 tons come from irrigation practices, and is in the middle of the range of values used for the seven salinity project areas e.g. Grand Valley, Colorado; Lower Gunnison, Colorado; Mancos Valley, Colorado; McElmo Creek, Colorado; Uinta Basin, Utah; Price-San Rafael, Utah; and Big Sandy River, Wyoming. The remaining 10,670 tons represents salt produced from natural sources. Salt loading estimates include approximately 4,160 tons from ditch seepage and approximately 9,870 tons from on-farm deep percolation of irrigation water. The proposed alternative plan contains structural and management improvements to irrigation systems which will in turn reduce salt loading to the Colorado River by 3,990 tons. Consultation-Public Participation The Bookcliff Conservation District led the public participation process, which included several Public meetings. Public involvement primarily consisted of meetings; however, local newspapers were used to publicize the project. Several State and Federal agencies were consulted during project plan development. E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 221 / Thursday, November 17, 2005 / Notices Proposed Action The proposed action will result in reducing seepage from the lateral ditches and increasing the irrigation efficiency to reduce deep percolation on 2,800 acres. This action will consist of piping or concrete lining 45,000 linear feet of earthen irrigation ditches. On-farm irrigation improvements would consist of improved surface application systems and sprinkler irrigation. The estimated total construction cost for the pipeline and sprinkler systems is $3,546,000. The total estimated project cost is $4,964,400. It is recommended that the federal cost-share used to implement the plan not be greater than 75 percent. A cost effectiveness analysis was used to determine the annual cost per ton of salt reduction. agencies did not reveal any violations of any laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act. Many of the wetlands in the project area are ‘‘irrigation induced.’’ A minimal number of these acres would be impacted. Wetland functions for the majority of these are already impacted by the land use associated with them. The distribution and size of these wetlands is not likely to change. The water quality of the Colorado River will be enhanced due to a reduction in salt loading from agriculture. The agricultural producers participating in the project will benefit from the labor savings associated with implementation of improved on-farm irrigation application systems. Basic Conclusions The conservation treatment associated with the proposed action will not change the air quality or potable water quality of the area. The project will not create any new hazards to the transportation network within the effected project area. For these reasons it is felt that the public health and safety conditions of the effected area will not be significantly impacted. There are no known unique geographic features in the project area that could be impacted by the proposed action. During the inter-agency review process of the project plan no highly controversial effects were identified. Past experience with similar projects in the area provide a high degree of confidence in the predicted impacts of the proposed actions. This project is not unusual in nature and is quite similar to a project currently being implemented in Mesa County. For this reason we feel confident that no precedents are being set with this project. No significant individual or cumulative effects to the human environment are expected when considering the context and intensity of the proposed action. Our project investigations did not identify any cultural resource sites currently listed on the National List of Historic Places. In light of this, the proposed action will not impact any such sites. Threatened and endangered species habitats do exist within the project boundaries. The proposed treatment will not change the extent or composition of this habitat therefore no impact is anticipated. Communications with State and Federal natural resource management I find that the proposed action is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:38 Nov 16, 2005 Jkt 208001 Ultimate Conclusion Dennis Alexander, Assistant State Conservationist-Programs. [FR Doc. 05–22809 Filed 11–16–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–16–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security [Docket No. 05–BIS–03] Action Affecting Export Privileges; Performance Medical Supplies; In the Matter of: Performance Medical Supplies, 16 Gardenia Cresent, Cheltenham, Victoria 3192, Australia; Respondent; Order Relating to Performance Medical Supplies The Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘BIS’’) has initiated an administrative proceeding against Performance Medical Supplies (‘‘Performance Medical Supplies’’) pursuant to Section 766.3 of the Export Administration Regulations (currently codified at 15 CFR Parts 730– 774 (2005)) (‘‘Regulations’’),1 and Section 13(c) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401–2420 (2000)) (‘‘Act’’),2 through issuance of a charging 1 The violations charged occurred in 2000. The Regulations governing the violations at issue are found in the 2000 version of the Code of Federal Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730–774 (2000)). The 2005 Regulations establish the procedures that apply to this matter. 2 From August 21, 1994 through November 12, 2000, the Act was in lapse. During that period, the President, through Executive Order 12924, which had been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the last of which was August 3, 2000 (3 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69733 letter to Performance Medical Supplies that alleged that Performance Medical Supplies committed 10 violations of the Regulations. Specifically, the charges are: 1. One violation of 15 CFR 764.2(d)— Conspiracy to Export Physical Therapy Equipment to Iran Without the Required U.S. Government Authorizations: In or about April 2000, Performance Medical Supplies conspired and acted in concert with others, known and unknown, to bring about acts that constitute violations of the Regulations by knowingly participating in the export of physical therapy equipment from the United States, via Australia, to Iran without the required U.S. Government authorization. Pursuant to Section 746.7 of the Regulations, authorization was required from the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of the Treasury (‘‘OFAC’’) before the physical therapy equipment, items subject to the Regulations and the Iranian Transactions Regulations, could be exported from the United States to Iran. In furtherance of conspiracy, Performance Medical Supplies and its co-conspirator devised and employed a scheme under which Performance Medical Supplies would purchase the items from its co-conspirator in the United States and would then forward the items to Iran. 2. Three violations of 15 CFR 764.2(b)—Aiding the Export of Physical Therapy Equipment to Iran Without the Required U.S. Government Authorization: From on or about March 28, 2000 through and including April 7, 2000, Performance Medical Supplies engaged in conduct prohibited by Regulations when it, on three occasions, aided the export of physical therapy equipment from the United States to Iran, via Australia, without the required U.S. Government authorization. Pursuant to Section 746.7 of the Regulations, authorization from OFAC was required for the export of physical therapy equipment, items subject to the Regulations and the Iranian Transactions Regulations, from the United States to Iran. The U.S. exporter did not have OFAC authorization for the export. CFR 2000 Comp. 397 (2001)), continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701– 1706 (2000)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). On November 13, 2000, the Act was reauthorized and it remained in effect through August 20, 2001. Since August 21, 2001, the Act has been in lapse and the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), as extended by the Notice of August 2, 2005 (70 FR 45273, August 5, 2005), has continued the Regulations in effect under IEEPA. E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 221 (Thursday, November 17, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69732-69733]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22809]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resource Conservation Service


Finding of No Significant Impact for Silt Salinity Control 
Project, Garfield County, CO

Introduction

    The plan/environmental assessment was developed under the authority 
of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1936. Funding 
for implementation is expected to be provided under the Federal 
Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, Public Law 104-127, as amended; 
Food Security Act of 1985, Subtitle D, Title XII, 16 U.S.C. 3830 et 
seq. An environmental evaluation was undertaken in conjunction with the 
development of the watershed plan. This evaluation was conducted in 
consultation with local, State and Federal agencies as well as with 
interested organizations and individuals. Copies of the Plan/
Environmental may be obtained by contacting Allen Green, Colorado State 
Conservationist at the following address. Data developed during the 
environmental evaluation is available for public review at the 
following location as well: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural 
Resource Conservation Service, 655 Parfet St., Lakewood, Colorado 
80215-5517.

Background

    The Silt unit was not identified by name in Title II of the 
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act, but was identified by USDA 
as an area which should be studied for possible salinity control.
    The combined environmental assessment has three major components: 
(1) To determine the contribution of salt loading from the irrigated 
farmland; (2) to determine the opportunity for USDA to reduce salt 
loading through improvements in irrigation delivery and application 
systems; (3) to determine environmental effects of the proposed action.
    Approximately 7,430 acres can be irrigated in the Silt Unit by five 
irrigation ditches. One of the aspects of the environmental evaluation 
involved inventorying and analyzing current irrigation systems and 
management practices. Data was analyzed on the five irrigation ditch 
systems. Each of the systems was analyzed to determine what types of 
improvements are needed. The remaining ditches were not studied because 
they are small or no longer in use.
    The Wasatch Formation, a claystone shale marine formation with a 
very high salt content, underlies much of the valley and is the 
principal source of salt contributed to the Colorado River. Lenses of 
crystaline salt often are exposed during excavation into shale. Because 
of the arid climate, salts have not been leached naturally and applying 
excess irrigation water to the soil greatly accelerates the leaching 
process.
    The Silt Unit contributes approximately 24,700 tons of salt 
annually to the Colorado River based on the 17-year USGS record of 
volume and concentration of outflow, minus volume and concentration of 
inflow. The 17-year record spans a good representation of dry and wet 
years. Approximately 14,030 tons come from irrigation practices, and is 
in the middle of the range of values used for the seven salinity 
project areas e.g. Grand Valley, Colorado; Lower Gunnison, Colorado; 
Mancos Valley, Colorado; McElmo Creek, Colorado; Uinta Basin, Utah; 
Price-San Rafael, Utah; and Big Sandy River, Wyoming. The remaining 
10,670 tons represents salt produced from natural sources. Salt loading 
estimates include approximately 4,160 tons from ditch seepage and 
approximately 9,870 tons from on-farm deep percolation of irrigation 
water.
    The proposed alternative plan contains structural and management 
improvements to irrigation systems which will in turn reduce salt 
loading to the Colorado River by 3,990 tons.

Consultation-Public Participation

    The Bookcliff Conservation District led the public participation 
process, which included several Public meetings. Public involvement 
primarily consisted of meetings; however, local newspapers were used to 
publicize the project. Several State and Federal agencies were 
consulted during project plan development.

[[Page 69733]]

Proposed Action

    The proposed action will result in reducing seepage from the 
lateral ditches and increasing the irrigation efficiency to reduce deep 
percolation on 2,800 acres.
    This action will consist of piping or concrete lining 45,000 linear 
feet of earthen irrigation ditches. On-farm irrigation improvements 
would consist of improved surface application systems and sprinkler 
irrigation.
    The estimated total construction cost for the pipeline and 
sprinkler systems is $3,546,000. The total estimated project cost is 
$4,964,400. It is recommended that the federal cost-share used to 
implement the plan not be greater than 75 percent. A cost effectiveness 
analysis was used to determine the annual cost per ton of salt 
reduction.

Basic Conclusions

    The conservation treatment associated with the proposed action will 
not change the air quality or potable water quality of the area. The 
project will not create any new hazards to the transportation network 
within the effected project area. For these reasons it is felt that the 
public health and safety conditions of the effected area will not be 
significantly impacted.
    There are no known unique geographic features in the project area 
that could be impacted by the proposed action.
    During the inter-agency review process of the project plan no 
highly controversial effects were identified.
    Past experience with similar projects in the area provide a high 
degree of confidence in the predicted impacts of the proposed actions.
    This project is not unusual in nature and is quite similar to a 
project currently being implemented in Mesa County. For this reason we 
feel confident that no precedents are being set with this project.
    No significant individual or cumulative effects to the human 
environment are expected when considering the context and intensity of 
the proposed action.
    Our project investigations did not identify any cultural resource 
sites currently listed on the National List of Historic Places. In 
light of this, the proposed action will not impact any such sites.
    Threatened and endangered species habitats do exist within the 
project boundaries. The proposed treatment will not change the extent 
or composition of this habitat therefore no impact is anticipated.
    Communications with State and Federal natural resource management 
agencies did not reveal any violations of any laws, including the 
National Environmental Policy Act.
    Many of the wetlands in the project area are ``irrigation 
induced.'' A minimal number of these acres would be impacted. Wetland 
functions for the majority of these are already impacted by the land 
use associated with them. The distribution and size of these wetlands 
is not likely to change.
    The water quality of the Colorado River will be enhanced due to a 
reduction in salt loading from agriculture.
    The agricultural producers participating in the project will 
benefit from the labor savings associated with implementation of 
improved on-farm irrigation application systems.

Ultimate Conclusion

    I find that the proposed action is not a major Federal action 
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

Dennis Alexander,
Assistant State Conservationist-Programs.
[FR Doc. 05-22809 Filed 11-16-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-P