Tongue River Watershed, Cavalier and Pembina Counties, ND, 36316-36318 [E6-10015]

Download as PDF 36316 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 122 / Monday, June 26, 2006 / Notices SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committees Act (Pub. L. 92–463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community SelfDetermination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106– 393) the Alpine County Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet on Thursday, July 27, 2006 at 18:00 at the Diamond Valley School for business meetings. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss issues relating to implementing the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Payment to States) and expenditure of Title II funds. The meetings are open to the public. DATES: Thursday, July 27, 2006 at 18:00 hours. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Diamond Valley School, 35 Hawkside Drive, Markleeville, California 96120. Send written comments to Franklin Pemberton, Alphine County RAC coordinator, c/o USDA Forest Service, HumboldtToiyabe N.F., Carson Ranger District 1536 So. Carson Street, Carson City, NV 89701. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alpine Co. RAC Coordinator, Franklin Pemberton at (775)–884–8150; or Gary Schiff, Carson District Ranger and Designated Federal Officer, at (775)– 884–8100, or electronically to fpemberton@fs.fed.us. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Meeting is open to the public. Council discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Council members. However, persons who wish to bring urban and community forestry matters to the attention of the council may file written statements with the Council staff before and after the meeting. review requests for grant extensions and/or changing the focus of approved projects. DATES: The meeting will be held June 19, 2006, from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the City of Sonora Fire Department located at 201 South Shepherd Street, in Sonora, California (CA 95370). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pat Kaunert, Committee Coordinator, USDA, Stanislaus National Forest, 19777 Greenley Road, Sonora, CA 95370 (209) 532–3671; E-mail pkaunert@fs.fed.us. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda items to be covered include: (1) Presentation of primarily Forest Service project submittals by project proponents; (2) Consideration of requests for grant extensions and/or changing previously submitted projects; (3) Pulic comment on meeting proceedings. This meeting is open to the public. Dated: June 14, 2006. Edward Monnig, Forest Supervisor, Humboldt-Toiyabe N.F. [FR Doc. 06–5654 Filed 6–23–06; 8:45 am] Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c)of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR Part 1500); and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, gives notice that an environmental impact statement is not being prepared for the Tongue River Watershed, Cavalier and Pembina Counties, North Dakota. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Schmidt, Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 220 E. Rosser Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota, at (701) 530–2074. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental assessment of this federally assisted action indicates that the project will not cause significant local, regional, or national impacts on the environment. As a result of these DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Tuolumne County Resource Advisory Committee Forest Service, USDA. Notice of meeting. AGENCY: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES SUMMARY: The Tuolumne County Resource Advisory Committee will meet on June 19, 2006 at the City of Sonora Fire Department, in Sonora, California. The purpose of the meeting is to hear 17 presentations made by project proponents. The committee will also VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:00 Jun 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 BILLING CODE 3410–ED–M Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Tongue River Watershed, Cavalier and Pembina Counties, ND Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of a Finding of No Significant Impact. AGENCY: SUMMARY: BILLING CODE 3410–11–M ACTION: Dated: June 9, 2006. Tom Quinn, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 06–5662 Filed 6–23–06; 8:45 am] PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 findings, J.R. Flores, State Conservationist, has determined that the preparation and review of an environmental impact statement are not needed for this project. The project purpose is to bring Tongue River Watershed Structure M–4 into compliance with current State and Federal dam design and safety criteria; to continue to provide flood protection and to reduce the risk of loss of human life. The planned works of improvement include rehabilitating and upgrading Renwick Dam by installing a roller compacted concrete auxiliary spillway, raising the top of the dam, and modifying the principal spillway to allow a one foot rise to the permanent pool to provide for sediment storage for the extended life of the structure. A two lane access road connecting recreation facilities on the north side of the lake to Icelandic State Park Headquarters on the south side of the park will be constructed on the upstream side of the embankment. The Notice of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has been forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency and to various Federal, State, and local agencies and interested parties. A limited number of copies of the FONSI are available to fill single copy requests at the above address. Basic data developed during the environmental assessment are on file and may be reviewed by contacting James E. Schmidt, Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources at (701) 530–2074. No administrative action on implementation of the proposal will be taken until 30 days after the date of this publication in the Federal Register. James E. Schmidt, Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources. Finding of No Significant Impact for Tongue River Watershed Cavalier and Pembina Counties, North Dakota Introduction The Tongue River Watershed is a federally assisted action authorized for planning under Public Law 83–566, the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act. An environmental assessment was undertaken in conjunction with the development of Supplement No. 2 of the watershed plan for the purpose of rehabilitating Renwick Dam 9 (Structure M–4) under Public Law 106–472. This assessment was conducted in consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies as well as with interested organizations and individuals. Data developed during the assessment are available for public E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM 26JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 122 / Monday, June 26, 2006 / Notices review at the following location: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 220 E. Rosser Ave., P.O. Box 1458, Bismarck, North Dakota 58502–1458. rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES Recommended Action Proposed is the rehabilitation of aging flood water retarding structure (M–4) in the Tongue River Watershed (Renwick Dam). This structure will provide flood control for downstream farms, cropland, roads, bridges, and the city of Cavalier. The structure will control 93,300 acres of drainage area. The recommended plan consists of constructing a roller compacted concrete (RCC) spillway through the existing dam with the park entrance road, on the face of the dam, on the upstream side. The RCC spillway’s purpose is to convey the design flood runoff safely through the reservoir without overtopping the earthen embankment. A roller compacted concrete spillway is similar to conventional concrete, yet its material properties allow it to be worked and hauled by traditional earth moving equipment. The embankment will be partially excavated to design grades for construction of a 500-footwide auxiliary RCC spillway. The RCC spillway will be constructed as a broadcrested weir. Material excavated from the embankment to construct the spillway will be used as earth-fill to construct a dike in the existing auxiliary spillway and to raise the top of the embankment. Effects of Recommended Action The recommended action protects flood damages to building, transportation services land, crops, prime farmland, and the city of Cavalier. The economic and social well-being of the residents within and downstream of the watershed will remain intact. Renwick Dam provides an important recreation opportunity for the region. The recommended plan will meet the sponsor’s objectives of bringing Renwick Dam into compliance with the current dam safety and flood insurance criteria, maintaining the current 100year floodplain, and addressing the resource concerns identified by the public. As designed, Renwick Dam will meet all current NRCS and State of North Dakota dam safety and performance standards. Studies were completed by both private contractors and State and Federal Agency personnel to evaluate the watershed water coming into and out of the Renwick and Senator Young Dams. Land cover surveys were completed to determine the need for additional land treatment practices in VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:00 Jun 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 the watershed. A detailed study was completed to determine the existing depth of sediment load in the Renwick Reservoir. Also studied was the impact sediment disturbance would have on the reservoir fishery and other aquatic life. The study revealed Renwick Reservoir sediment pool is estimated to be 50–60 percent full. A water quality/ sediment survey conducted in September 2003, indicated between 115 and 150 acre feet of sediment in the pool. Preliminary investigations within the project area revealed no cultural or historic properties within the project area. Land disturbance has occurred through development of the area around the structure with the recreation area on the north side of the reservoir, and disturbance during the actual construction of the structure in the early 1960s. A summary of the project accompanied by maps and aerial photographs was provided to the North Dakota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) on August 31, 2001, with a request for concurrence. A passive concurrence from the North Dakota SHPO has been received. The probability of discovering a new site is low, but if there is a significant cultural resource discovery during construction, appropriate notice will be made by NRCS to the SHPO and the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO). Consultation and coordination have been and will continue to be used to ensure the provisions of Section 106 of Public Law 89–665 have been met and to include provisions of Public Law 89– 523, as amended by Public Law 93–291. NRCS will take action as prescribed in NRCS GM 420, Part 401, to protect or recover any significant cultural resources discovered during construction. Threatened or endangered species may occasionally be present in the watershed but the project will have no adverse impacts on these species. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was completed. No wilderness areas are in the watershed. Scenic values will be temporarily decreased at the construction site. Once construction is complete, vegetation will enhance the site to its preconstruction condition. No significant adverse environmental impacts will result from installations except for minor inconveniences to local residents during construction. Alternatives The planned action is the most practical means of reducing the high hazard dam problems. No significant PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36317 adverse environmental impacts will result from installation of the measures. No other practical alternative achieved the economical, environmental, or social needs of the watershed land users or project sponsors. The no action alternative will not alleviate the dam from being a high hazard structure. The decommissioning of the dam will allow for severe flooding. The RCC auxiliary spillway with the park entrance on top of the Dam will meet the sponsor’s needs, but the RCC auxiliary spillway with the park entrance on the upstream side of the dam face was chosen to be more economically feasible to the sponsors. Consultation and Public Participation Formulation of the alternative plan process for Renwick Dam began with formal discussions with the sponsors. At a special meeting held on March 6, 2001, NRCS conveyed State law and policy associated with high hazard dams. The National Dam Safety Inspection Reports of 1978, 1983, 1987, and 1991 listed Renwick Dam in the high hazard category for potential loss of life in the event of failure. Sponsors received information about agency policy associated with Public Law 106– 472, The Small Watershed Rehabilitation Amendments of 2000, and related alternative plans of action. As a result of these discussions, the sponsors submitted an application on March 14, 2001, to NRCS requesting assistance for rehabilitation of Renwick Dam under the provisions of Public Law 106–472. A public meeting was held on April 16, 2002, to assess proposed measures and their potential impact on resources of concern. As a result of this meeting, fifteen items of concern were identified. A meeting and field tour with the North Dakota Interagency Committee was held on June 18–19, 2002, to assess proposed measures and their potential impact on resources of concern. A site visit with the NRCS National Water Management Center (NWMC) Staff, NRCS Planning Staff, and an engineer review team was held October 7, 8, and 9, 2002, to exchange a wide variety of ideas for the design. The sponsors recognized the complexity of the project and on May 22, 2003, initiated and adopted a Watershed Management Council (WMC). The WMC membership is made up of one representative from each local organization, and city and county political authorities within the surrounding Cavalier and Pembina watershed area. Through detailed analysis and consultation it was agreed, an increase of the permanent pool by E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM 26JNN1 36318 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 122 / Monday, June 26, 2006 / Notices one foot would be necessary to maintain the same volume as that above the sediment pool. Removal of sediment was determined to be an unreasonable component of any proposed action due to a lack of safe disposal sites, high risk of not meeting Clean Water Act laws, and unpredictable costs per unit volume of sediment removed. It was also determined the volumes of sediment proposed to be removed would have little to no benefit towards flood storage and reducing the amount of rehabilitation work required to bring the structure into compliance with the Federal Dam Safety Program. Eleven alternatives were considered with all eleven being analyzed of having a one foot rise above the current elevation. All these alternatives were considered in the evaluation process by NRCS, project sponsors, Federal, State, and county agencies who were involved in part or all of the planning processes related to Supplement No. 2, the proposed rehabilitation of Flood Water Retarding Structure M–4. Certain Pasta From Italy: Preliminary Results of the Ninth Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Revoke Order, In Part, 71 FR 17440 (April 6, 2006) (‘‘Preliminary Results’’). We preliminarily found that the countervailing duty rates during the period of review (‘‘POR’’) for all of the producers/exporters under review are less than 0.5 percent and are, consequently, zero or de minimis. We did not receive any comments on our preliminary results, and we have made no revisions. The final net subsidy rates for the reviewed companies are listed below in the section entitled ‘‘Final Results of Review.’’ EFFECTIVE DATE: June 26, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey Twyman or Brandon Farlander, AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3534 and (202) 482–0182, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Conclusion The environmental assessment summarized above indicates this Federal action will not cause significant local, regional, or National impacts on the environment. Therefore, based on the above findings, I have determined that an environmental impact Statement for the Tongue River Watershed (Renwick Dam), Supplement No. 2 is not required. Background On July 24, 1996, the Department published a countervailing duty order on certain pasta (‘‘pasta’’ or ‘‘subject merchandise’’) from Italy. See Notice of Countervailing Duty Order and Amended Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Certain Pasta From Italy, 61 FR 38544 (July 24, 1996). On July 1, 2005, the Department published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to Request Administrative Review’’ of this countervailing duty order for calendar year 2004, the POR. See Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Order, Finding, or Suspended Investigation; Opportunity to Request Administrative Review, 70 FR 38099 (July 1, 2005). On July 28, 2005, we received a request for review from Pastificio Laporta S.a.s (‘‘Laporta’’). On July 29, 2005, we received requests for reviews from the following four producers/exporters of subject merchandise: Pastificio Antonio Pallante S.r.l. (‘‘Pallante’’), Corticella Molini e Pastifici S.p.a. (‘‘Corticella’’)/ Pasta Combattenti S.p.a. (‘‘Combattenti’’) (collectively, ‘‘Corticella/Combattenti’’), Atar S.r.l. (‘‘Atar’’), and Moline e Pastificio Tomasello S.r.l. (‘‘Tomasello’’). On August 1, 2005, we received a request for review and a request for revocation from Pasta Lensi S.r.l. (‘‘Pasta Lensi’’).1 Dated: June 15, 2006. James E. Schmidt, Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources. [FR Doc. E6–10015 Filed 6–23–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–16–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–475–819] Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of the Ninth Countervailing Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Revocation of Order, in Part Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On April 6, 2006, the U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) published in the Federal Register its preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty order on certain pasta from Italy for the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004. See rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES AGENCY: VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:00 Jun 23, 2006 Jkt 208001 1 Pasta Lensi is the successor-in-interest to IAPC Italia S.r.l. See Notice of Final Results of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Changed Circumstances Reviews: Certain Pasta from Italy, 68 FR 41553 (July 14, 2003). PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 (See the ‘‘Partial Revocation’’ section, below.) In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we published a notice of initiation of the review on August 29, 2005. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 70 FR 51009 (August 29, 2005). On August 31, 2005, we issued countervailing duty questionnaires to the Commission of the European Union, the Government of Italy (‘‘GOI’’), Pallante, Corticella/Combattenti, Pasta Lensi, Tomasello, Laporta, and Atar. We received all responses to our questionnaire in October 2005. We issued supplemental questionnaires to the respondents in November 2005, and we received responses to our supplemental questionnaires in November and December 2005. On September 15, 2005, Laporta withdrew its request for review. On September 29, 2005, Tomasello withdrew its request for review. On October 25, 2005, Pallante withdrew its request for review. Based on withdrawals of the requests for review, we rescinded this administrative review for Laporta, Tomasello, and Pallante. See Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 59723 (October 13, 2005) (rescinding review for Laporta); Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 61788 (October 26, 2005) (rescinding review for Tomasello); and Certain Pasta from Italy: Notice of Partial Rescission of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review, 70 FR 69515 (November 16, 2005) (rescinding review for Pallante). We have instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’) to liquidate any entries from Pallante, Laporta, and Tomasello during the POR and to assess countervailing duties at the rate that was applied at the time of entry. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(f)(2)(ii) and 351.307(b)(1)(iii), we verified information submitted by the GOI for Pasta Lensi, Atar, Corticella, and Combattenti in Rome, Italy on February 13–15, 2006. See ‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of the Government of Italy in the 9th Administrative Review,’’ (March 31, 2006). We verified information submitted by Pasta Lensi in Verolanuova, Italy on February 17 and 20, 2006. See ‘‘Verification of the Questionnaire Responses of Pasta Lensi S.r.l. in the 9th Administrative Review,’’ dated March 31, 2006. Since the publication of the Preliminary Results, we invited interested parties to submit briefs or E:\FR\FM\26JNN1.SGM 26JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 122 (Monday, June 26, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36316-36318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10015]


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

Department of Agriculture

Natural Resources Conservation Service


Tongue River Watershed, Cavalier and Pembina Counties, ND

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of a Finding of No Significant Impact.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c)of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations 
(40 CFR Part 1500); and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, gives notice that an environmental 
impact statement is not being prepared for the Tongue River Watershed, 
Cavalier and Pembina Counties, North Dakota.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James E. Schmidt, Assistant State 
Conservationist for Water Resources, Natural Resources Conservation 
Service, 220 E. Rosser Avenue, Bismarck, North Dakota, at (701) 530-
2074.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental assessment of this 
federally assisted action indicates that the project will not cause 
significant local, regional, or national impacts on the environment. As 
a result of these findings, J.R. Flores, State Conservationist, has 
determined that the preparation and review of an environmental impact 
statement are not needed for this project.
    The project purpose is to bring Tongue River Watershed Structure M-
4 into compliance with current State and Federal dam design and safety 
criteria; to continue to provide flood protection and to reduce the 
risk of loss of human life. The planned works of improvement include 
rehabilitating and upgrading Renwick Dam by installing a roller 
compacted concrete auxiliary spillway, raising the top of the dam, and 
modifying the principal spillway to allow a one foot rise to the 
permanent pool to provide for sediment storage for the extended life of 
the structure. A two lane access road connecting recreation facilities 
on the north side of the lake to Icelandic State Park Headquarters on 
the south side of the park will be constructed on the upstream side of 
the embankment.
    The Notice of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has been 
forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency and to various 
Federal, State, and local agencies and interested parties. A limited 
number of copies of the FONSI are available to fill single copy 
requests at the above address. Basic data developed during the 
environmental assessment are on file and may be reviewed by contacting 
James E. Schmidt, Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources 
at (701) 530-2074.
    No administrative action on implementation of the proposal will be 
taken until 30 days after the date of this publication in the Federal 
Register.

James E. Schmidt,
Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources.

Finding of No Significant Impact for Tongue River Watershed Cavalier 
and Pembina Counties, North Dakota

Introduction

    The Tongue River Watershed is a federally assisted action 
authorized for planning under Public Law 83-566, the Watershed 
Protection and Flood Prevention Act. An environmental assessment was 
undertaken in conjunction with the development of Supplement No. 2 of 
the watershed plan for the purpose of rehabilitating Renwick Dam 9 
(Structure M-4) under Public Law 106-472. This assessment was conducted 
in consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies as well as with 
interested organizations and individuals. Data developed during the 
assessment are available for public

[[Page 36317]]

review at the following location: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 
Natural Resources Conservation Service, 220 E. Rosser Ave., P.O. Box 
1458, Bismarck, North Dakota 58502-1458.

Recommended Action

    Proposed is the rehabilitation of aging flood water retarding 
structure (M-4) in the Tongue River Watershed (Renwick Dam). This 
structure will provide flood control for downstream farms, cropland, 
roads, bridges, and the city of Cavalier. The structure will control 
93,300 acres of drainage area. The recommended plan consists of 
constructing a roller compacted concrete (RCC) spillway through the 
existing dam with the park entrance road, on the face of the dam, on 
the upstream side. The RCC spillway's purpose is to convey the design 
flood runoff safely through the reservoir without overtopping the 
earthen embankment. A roller compacted concrete spillway is similar to 
conventional concrete, yet its material properties allow it to be 
worked and hauled by traditional earth moving equipment. The embankment 
will be partially excavated to design grades for construction of a 500-
foot-wide auxiliary RCC spillway. The RCC spillway will be constructed 
as a broad-crested weir. Material excavated from the embankment to 
construct the spillway will be used as earth-fill to construct a dike 
in the existing auxiliary spillway and to raise the top of the 
embankment.

Effects of Recommended Action

    The recommended action protects flood damages to building, 
transportation services land, crops, prime farmland, and the city of 
Cavalier. The economic and social well-being of the residents within 
and downstream of the watershed will remain intact. Renwick Dam 
provides an important recreation opportunity for the region. The 
recommended plan will meet the sponsor's objectives of bringing Renwick 
Dam into compliance with the current dam safety and flood insurance 
criteria, maintaining the current 100-year floodplain, and addressing 
the resource concerns identified by the public. As designed, Renwick 
Dam will meet all current NRCS and State of North Dakota dam safety and 
performance standards.
    Studies were completed by both private contractors and State and 
Federal Agency personnel to evaluate the watershed water coming into 
and out of the Renwick and Senator Young Dams. Land cover surveys were 
completed to determine the need for additional land treatment practices 
in the watershed. A detailed study was completed to determine the 
existing depth of sediment load in the Renwick Reservoir. Also studied 
was the impact sediment disturbance would have on the reservoir fishery 
and other aquatic life. The study revealed Renwick Reservoir sediment 
pool is estimated to be 50-60 percent full. A water quality/sediment 
survey conducted in September 2003, indicated between 115 and 150 acre 
feet of sediment in the pool.
    Preliminary investigations within the project area revealed no 
cultural or historic properties within the project area. Land 
disturbance has occurred through development of the area around the 
structure with the recreation area on the north side of the reservoir, 
and disturbance during the actual construction of the structure in the 
early 1960s. A summary of the project accompanied by maps and aerial 
photographs was provided to the North Dakota State Historic 
Preservation Office (SHPO) on August 31, 2001, with a request for 
concurrence. A passive concurrence from the North Dakota SHPO has been 
received. The probability of discovering a new site is low, but if 
there is a significant cultural resource discovery during construction, 
appropriate notice will be made by NRCS to the SHPO and the Tribal 
Historic Preservation Office (THPO). Consultation and coordination have 
been and will continue to be used to ensure the provisions of Section 
106 of Public Law 89-665 have been met and to include provisions of 
Public Law 89-523, as amended by Public Law 93-291. NRCS will take 
action as prescribed in NRCS GM 420, Part 401, to protect or recover 
any significant cultural resources discovered during construction.
    Threatened or endangered species may occasionally be present in the 
watershed but the project will have no adverse impacts on these 
species. Consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was 
completed.
    No wilderness areas are in the watershed.
    Scenic values will be temporarily decreased at the construction 
site. Once construction is complete, vegetation will enhance the site 
to its preconstruction condition.
    No significant adverse environmental impacts will result from 
installations except for minor inconveniences to local residents during 
construction.

Alternatives

    The planned action is the most practical means of reducing the high 
hazard dam problems. No significant adverse environmental impacts will 
result from installation of the measures. No other practical 
alternative achieved the economical, environmental, or social needs of 
the watershed land users or project sponsors. The no action alternative 
will not alleviate the dam from being a high hazard structure. The 
decommissioning of the dam will allow for severe flooding. The RCC 
auxiliary spillway with the park entrance on top of the Dam will meet 
the sponsor's needs, but the RCC auxiliary spillway with the park 
entrance on the upstream side of the dam face was chosen to be more 
economically feasible to the sponsors.

Consultation and Public Participation

    Formulation of the alternative plan process for Renwick Dam began 
with formal discussions with the sponsors. At a special meeting held on 
March 6, 2001, NRCS conveyed State law and policy associated with high 
hazard dams. The National Dam Safety Inspection Reports of 1978, 1983, 
1987, and 1991 listed Renwick Dam in the high hazard category for 
potential loss of life in the event of failure. Sponsors received 
information about agency policy associated with Public Law 106-472, The 
Small Watershed Rehabilitation Amendments of 2000, and related 
alternative plans of action.
    As a result of these discussions, the sponsors submitted an 
application on March 14, 2001, to NRCS requesting assistance for 
rehabilitation of Renwick Dam under the provisions of Public Law 106-
472.
    A public meeting was held on April 16, 2002, to assess proposed 
measures and their potential impact on resources of concern. As a 
result of this meeting, fifteen items of concern were identified.
    A meeting and field tour with the North Dakota Interagency 
Committee was held on June 18-19, 2002, to assess proposed measures and 
their potential impact on resources of concern.
    A site visit with the NRCS National Water Management Center (NWMC) 
Staff, NRCS Planning Staff, and an engineer review team was held 
October 7, 8, and 9, 2002, to exchange a wide variety of ideas for the 
design.
    The sponsors recognized the complexity of the project and on May 
22, 2003, initiated and adopted a Watershed Management Council (WMC). 
The WMC membership is made up of one representative from each local 
organization, and city and county political authorities within the 
surrounding Cavalier and Pembina watershed area. Through detailed 
analysis and consultation it was agreed, an increase of the permanent 
pool by

[[Page 36318]]

one foot would be necessary to maintain the same volume as that above 
the sediment pool. Removal of sediment was determined to be an 
unreasonable component of any proposed action due to a lack of safe 
disposal sites, high risk of not meeting Clean Water Act laws, and 
unpredictable costs per unit volume of sediment removed. It was also 
determined the volumes of sediment proposed to be removed would have 
little to no benefit towards flood storage and reducing the amount of 
rehabilitation work required to bring the structure into compliance 
with the Federal Dam Safety Program. Eleven alternatives were 
considered with all eleven being analyzed of having a one foot rise 
above the current elevation. All these alternatives were considered in 
the evaluation process by NRCS, project sponsors, Federal, State, and 
county agencies who were involved in part or all of the planning 
processes related to Supplement No. 2, the proposed rehabilitation of 
Flood Water Retarding Structure M-4.

Conclusion

    The environmental assessment summarized above indicates this 
Federal action will not cause significant local, regional, or National 
impacts on the environment. Therefore, based on the above findings, I 
have determined that an environmental impact Statement for the Tongue 
River Watershed (Renwick Dam), Supplement No. 2 is not required.

Dated: June 15, 2006.

James E. Schmidt,

Assistant State Conservationist for Water Resources.

[FR Doc. E6-10015 Filed 6-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.