Hossain Ahmadi Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan, City of San Jose, Santa Clara County, CA, 17880-17881 [E9-8816]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
17880
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 73 / Friday, April 17, 2009 / Notices
DATES: All written comments must be
postmarked or transmitted not later than
June 8, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Current information about proposed
repairs to Kalaupapa dock or design of
appurtenant structures will be available
from Superintendent Steve Prokop,
Kalaupapa National Historical Park,
P.O. Box 2222, Kalaupapa, HI 96742
(808) 567–6802 (or at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov/kala).
Scoping Process: The NPS will
formally conclude the public scoping
phase (needed to inform preparation of
a Draft EIS) following receipt of any and
all comments as noted above. All
previously submitted comments are
documented in the administrative
record; only new issues and concerns
need to be submitted at this time.
During this final scoping period, public
meetings will also be conducted—the
dates, times, and locations will be
announced via local and regional press
media and on the project website (noted
above). Confirmed details may also be
obtained by contacting the
Superintendent of Kalaupapa NHP.
All new relevant environmental
information, or additional comments on
any issues that may be associated with
the proposed project, should be
submitted by mail to the attention of the
Superintendent (address as noted above,
or you may submit comments
electronically at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov/kala). Before
including your address, phone number,
e-mail address, or other personal
identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment, including your
personal identifying information, may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Decision Process: All information and
comments received will be carefully
considered in preparing a Draft EIS,
availability of which will be similarly
announced in the Federal Register.
Following release of the Draft EIS for
public and agency review, a Final EIS
will be prepared. As a delegated EIS, the
official responsible for approval of any
dock repair project is the Regional
Director, Pacific West Region, National
Park Service. Notice of approval of a
Record of Decision will also be
published in the Federal Register. The
official responsible for implementation
of the approved project will be the
Superintendent, Kalaupapa National
Historical Park.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 16, 2009
Jkt 217001
Dated: December 30, 2008.
Jonathan B. Jarvis,
Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
Editorial Note: This document was
received in the Office of the Federal Register
on April 10, 2009.
[FR Doc. E9–8623 Filed 4–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–GJ–M
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R8–ES–2009–N0060]; [1112–0000–
81420–F2]
Hossain Ahmadi Low-Effect Habitat
Conservation Plan, City of San Jose,
Santa Clara County, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: proposed
low-effect habitat conservation plan;
request for comment.
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, have received an
application from Hossain Ahmadi
(applicant) for a 3-year incidental take
permit for five species under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). The application
addresses the potential for ‘‘take’’ of
three listed animals, one listed plant,
and one non-listed plant. The applicant
would implement a conservation
program to minimize and mitigate the
project activities, as described in the
applicant’s low-effect habitat
conservation plan (plan). We request
comments on the applicant’s
application and plan, and the
preliminary determination that the plan
qualifies as a ‘‘low-effect’’ habitat
conservation plan, eligible for a
Categorical Exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA). We discuss
our basis for this determination in our
environmental action statement (EAS),
also available for public review.
DATES: We must receive written
comments on or before May 18, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Please address written
comments to Mike Thomas,
Conservation Planning Branch, U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage
Way, W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825.
Alternatively, you may send comments
by facsimile to (916) 414–6713.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Thomas, or Eric Tattersall,
Division Chief, Conservation Planning
Branch, at the address shown above or
at 916–414–6600 (telephone).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Availability of Documents
You may obtain copies of the permit
application, plan, and EAS from the
individuals in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Copies of these documents are
also available for public inspection, by
appointment, during regular business
hours, at the Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Background Information
Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) and its implementing Federal
regulations prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of fish or
wildlife species listed as endangered or
threatened. ‘‘Take’’ is defined under the
Act to include the following activities:
To harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect
listed animal species, or to attempt to
engage in such conduct. However,
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we
may issue permits to authorize
incidental take of listed species.
‘‘Incidental take’’ is defined by the Act
as take that is incidental to, and not the
purpose of, carrying out an otherwise
lawful activity. Regulations governing
incidental take permits for endangered
and threatened species, respectively, are
in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50
CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32.
Although take of listed plant species
is not prohibited under the Act, and
therefore cannot be authorized under an
incidental take permit, plant species
may be included on a permit in
recognition of the conservation benefits
provided to them under a habitat
conservation plan. All species included
in the incidental take permit would
receive assurances under our ‘‘No
Surprises’’ regulations (50 CFR
17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5)).
The applicant seeks an incident take
permit for covered activities within 9.2
acres (ac) (3.72 hectares (ha)) of
grassland the applicant owns in Santa
Clara County, California. The applicant
is requesting permits for take of three
animal species federally listed as
threatened: Bay checkerspot butterfly
(Euphydryas editha bayensis), California
red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii),
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 73 / Friday, April 17, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
and California tiger salamander
(Ambystoma californiense); one plant
species federally listed as endangered:
Santa Clara Valley dudleya (Dudleya
setchellii). The plan also includes one
non-listed plant species, the most
beautiful jewelflower (Streptanthus
albidus ssp. peramoenus). The plan
does not include any nonlisted animal
species. Collectively, these species are
referred to as ‘‘covered species’’ in the
plan.
Covered activities include the
following: Grading and ground leveling;
vegetation removal and planting; soil
compaction; building construction; and
use of heavy equipment (including, but
not limited to, bulldozers, cement
trucks, water trucks, and backhoes);
erosion control structures (such as silt
fencing and barriers); dust control (such
as watering surface soils); construction
of driveways; trenching; installation of
utilities and irrigation systems;, and
associated landscaping.
The applicant proposes to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate the effects to the
covered species associated with the
covered activities by fully implementing
the plan. Minimization measures will
include, but are not limited to, an
employee education program; biological
monitoring during construction and
earthmoving; a storm water, erosion,
and dust control plan; and salvage of
individual Santa Clara Valley dudleya
prior to construction. General
minimization measures will include:
Limiting staging and work areas to the
project site only; regular removal of all
foods and food-related trash every three
days; prohibiting pets from the project
site during construction; restricting
ground disturbance to the period of July
1 through November 30 (generally the
dry season), unless we authorize
otherwise; and maintenance of all
equipment to avoid fluid leaks.
Alternatives
Our proposed action is approving the
applicant’s plan and issuance of an
incidental take permit for the
applicant’s covered activities. As
required by the Act, the applicant’s plan
considers alternatives to the take under
the proposed action. The plan considers
the environmental consequences of one
alternative to the proposed action, the
No Action Alternative. Under the No
Action Alternative, we would not issue
a permit; the applicant would not build
the proposed single-family residence;
the project area would continue to
experience illegal off-road vehicle use,
illegal trash dumping, and trespassing;
and no take would occur for the
construction of the residence and its
associated structures.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:13 Apr 16, 2009
Jkt 217001
Under the proposed action
alternative, we would issue an
incidental take permit for the
applicant’s proposed project, which
includes the activities described above.
The proposed action alternative would
result in permanent loss of 1.33 ac (0.54
ha) of grassland habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly, California tiger
salamander, California red-legged frog,
Santa Clara Valley dudleya, and most
beautiful jewelflower. To mitigate for
these effects, the applicant proposes to
protect, enhance, and manage in
perpetuity 6.8 ac (2.76 ha) of on-site
grassland.
National Environmental Policy Act
As described in our EAS, we have
made the preliminary determination
that approval of the proposed plan and
issuance of the permit would qualify as
a categorical exclusion under NEPA (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as provided by
Federal regulations (40 CFR 1500, 5(k),
1507.3(b)(2), 1508.4) and the
Department of the Interior Manual (516
DM 2 and 516 DM 8). Our EAS found
that the proposed plan qualifies as a
‘‘low-effect’’ habitat conservation plan,
as defined by our Habitat Conservation
Planning Handbook (November 1996).
Determination of low-effect habitat
conservation plans is based on the
following three criteria: (1)
Implementation of the proposed plan
would result in minor or negligible
effects on federally listed, proposed, and
candidate species and their habitats; (2)
implementation of the proposed plan
would result in minor or negligible
effects on other environmental values or
resources; and (3) impacts of the plan,
considered together with the impacts of
other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable similarly situated projects,
would not result, over time, in
cumulative effects to environmental
values or resources that would be
considered significant. Based upon the
preliminary determinations in the EAS,
we do not intend to prepare further
NEPA documentation. We will consider
public comments when making the final
determination on whether to prepare an
additional NEPA document on the
proposed action.
Public Review
We provide this notice pursuant to
section 10(c) of the Act and the NEPA
public-involvement regulations (40 CFR
1500.1(b), 1500.2(d), and 1506.6). We
will evaluate the permit application,
including the plan, and comments we
receive to determine whether the
application meets the requirements of
section 10(a) of the Act. If the
requirements are met, we will issue a
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17881
permit to the applicant for the
incidental take of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly, California tiger salamander,
California red-legged frog, Santa Clara
Valley dudleya, and most beautiful
jewelflower from the implementation of
the covered activities described in the
plan, or from mitigation conducted as
part of this plan. We will make the final
permit decision no sooner than 30 days
after the date of this notice.
Dated: April 13, 2009.
Jan Knight,
Acting Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E9–8816 Filed 4–16–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
National Register of Historic Places;
Notification of Pending Nominations
and Related Actions
Nominations for the following
properties being considered for listing
or related actions in the National
Register were received by the National
Park Service before April 4, 2009.
Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part
60 written comments concerning the
significance of these properties under
the National Register criteria for
evaluation may be forwarded by United
States Postal Service, to the National
Register of Historic Places, National
Park Service, 1849 C St., NW, 2280,
Washington, DC 20240; by all other
carriers, National Register of Historic
Places, National Park Service,1201 Eye
St., NW, 8th floor, Washington DC
20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447. Written
or faxed comments should be submitted
by May 4, 2009.
J. Paul Loether,
Chief, National Register of Historic Places/
National Historic Landmarks Program.
COLORADO
Weld County
Von Trotha-Firestien Farm at Bracewell,
(Historic Farms and Ranches of Weld
County MPS) Address Restricted, Greeley,
09000291.
IDAHO
Blaine County
Chase, Eben S. and Elizabeth S., House, 203
E. Bullion St., Hailey, 09000292.
Latah County
Nordby Farmstead, (Agricultural Properties
of Latah County, Idaho) 1301 Old Highway
95, Genesee, 09000293.
Snow, Arthur, House, 2949 Clyde Rd.,
Moscow, 09000294.
E:\FR\FM\17APN1.SGM
17APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 73 (Friday, April 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17880-17881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-8816]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-ES-2009-N0060]; [1112-0000-81420-F2]
Hossain Ahmadi Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan, City of San
Jose, Santa Clara County, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: proposed low-effect habitat
conservation plan; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have received an
application from Hossain Ahmadi (applicant) for a 3-year incidental
take permit for five species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act). The application addresses the potential for ``take''
of three listed animals, one listed plant, and one non-listed plant.
The applicant would implement a conservation program to minimize and
mitigate the project activities, as described in the applicant's low-
effect habitat conservation plan (plan). We request comments on the
applicant's application and plan, and the preliminary determination
that the plan qualifies as a ``low-effect'' habitat conservation plan,
eligible for a Categorical Exclusion under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). We discuss our basis for this
determination in our environmental action statement (EAS), also
available for public review.
DATES: We must receive written comments on or before May 18, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Please address written comments to Mike Thomas, Conservation
Planning Branch, U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825.
Alternatively, you may send comments by facsimile to (916) 414-6713.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Thomas, or Eric Tattersall,
Division Chief, Conservation Planning Branch, at the address shown
above or at 916-414-6600 (telephone).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Documents
You may obtain copies of the permit application, plan, and EAS from
the individuals in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Copies of these
documents are also available for public inspection, by appointment,
during regular business hours, at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES).
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Background Information
Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and its implementing
Federal regulations prohibit the ``take'' of fish or wildlife species
listed as endangered or threatened. ``Take'' is defined under the Act
to include the following activities: To harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed animal species, or
to attempt to engage in such conduct. However, under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, we may issue permits to authorize incidental
take of listed species. ``Incidental take'' is defined by the Act as
take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an
otherwise lawful activity. Regulations governing incidental take
permits for endangered and threatened species, respectively, are in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32.
Although take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the
Act, and therefore cannot be authorized under an incidental take
permit, plant species may be included on a permit in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided to them under a habitat conservation
plan. All species included in the incidental take permit would receive
assurances under our ``No Surprises'' regulations (50 CFR 17.22(b)(5)
and 17.32(b)(5)).
The applicant seeks an incident take permit for covered activities
within 9.2 acres (ac) (3.72 hectares (ha)) of grassland the applicant
owns in Santa Clara County, California. The applicant is requesting
permits for take of three animal species federally listed as
threatened: Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis),
California red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii),
[[Page 17881]]
and California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense); one plant
species federally listed as endangered: Santa Clara Valley dudleya
(Dudleya setchellii). The plan also includes one non-listed plant
species, the most beautiful jewelflower (Streptanthus albidus ssp.
peramoenus). The plan does not include any nonlisted animal species.
Collectively, these species are referred to as ``covered species'' in
the plan.
Covered activities include the following: Grading and ground
leveling; vegetation removal and planting; soil compaction; building
construction; and use of heavy equipment (including, but not limited
to, bulldozers, cement trucks, water trucks, and backhoes); erosion
control structures (such as silt fencing and barriers); dust control
(such as watering surface soils); construction of driveways; trenching;
installation of utilities and irrigation systems;, and associated
landscaping.
The applicant proposes to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the effects
to the covered species associated with the covered activities by fully
implementing the plan. Minimization measures will include, but are not
limited to, an employee education program; biological monitoring during
construction and earthmoving; a storm water, erosion, and dust control
plan; and salvage of individual Santa Clara Valley dudleya prior to
construction. General minimization measures will include: Limiting
staging and work areas to the project site only; regular removal of all
foods and food-related trash every three days; prohibiting pets from
the project site during construction; restricting ground disturbance to
the period of July 1 through November 30 (generally the dry season),
unless we authorize otherwise; and maintenance of all equipment to
avoid fluid leaks.
Alternatives
Our proposed action is approving the applicant's plan and issuance
of an incidental take permit for the applicant's covered activities. As
required by the Act, the applicant's plan considers alternatives to the
take under the proposed action. The plan considers the environmental
consequences of one alternative to the proposed action, the No Action
Alternative. Under the No Action Alternative, we would not issue a
permit; the applicant would not build the proposed single-family
residence; the project area would continue to experience illegal off-
road vehicle use, illegal trash dumping, and trespassing; and no take
would occur for the construction of the residence and its associated
structures.
Under the proposed action alternative, we would issue an incidental
take permit for the applicant's proposed project, which includes the
activities described above. The proposed action alternative would
result in permanent loss of 1.33 ac (0.54 ha) of grassland habitat for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly, California tiger salamander, California
red-legged frog, Santa Clara Valley dudleya, and most beautiful
jewelflower. To mitigate for these effects, the applicant proposes to
protect, enhance, and manage in perpetuity 6.8 ac (2.76 ha) of on-site
grassland.
National Environmental Policy Act
As described in our EAS, we have made the preliminary determination
that approval of the proposed plan and issuance of the permit would
qualify as a categorical exclusion under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
as provided by Federal regulations (40 CFR 1500, 5(k), 1507.3(b)(2),
1508.4) and the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 and 516 DM
8). Our EAS found that the proposed plan qualifies as a ``low-effect''
habitat conservation plan, as defined by our Habitat Conservation
Planning Handbook (November 1996). Determination of low-effect habitat
conservation plans is based on the following three criteria: (1)
Implementation of the proposed plan would result in minor or negligible
effects on federally listed, proposed, and candidate species and their
habitats; (2) implementation of the proposed plan would result in minor
or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources; and
(3) impacts of the plan, considered together with the impacts of other
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable similarly situated projects,
would not result, over time, in cumulative effects to environmental
values or resources that would be considered significant. Based upon
the preliminary determinations in the EAS, we do not intend to prepare
further NEPA documentation. We will consider public comments when
making the final determination on whether to prepare an additional NEPA
document on the proposed action.
Public Review
We provide this notice pursuant to section 10(c) of the Act and the
NEPA public-involvement regulations (40 CFR 1500.1(b), 1500.2(d), and
1506.6). We will evaluate the permit application, including the plan,
and comments we receive to determine whether the application meets the
requirements of section 10(a) of the Act. If the requirements are met,
we will issue a permit to the applicant for the incidental take of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly, California tiger salamander, California red-
legged frog, Santa Clara Valley dudleya, and most beautiful jewelflower
from the implementation of the covered activities described in the
plan, or from mitigation conducted as part of this plan. We will make
the final permit decision no sooner than 30 days after the date of this
notice.
Dated: April 13, 2009.
Jan Knight,
Acting Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office,
Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. E9-8816 Filed 4-16-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P