Tongue River Watershed, Cavalier and Pembina Counties, ND, 36316-36318 [E6-10015]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
