Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Stehekin River Corridor Implementation Plan; Lake Chelan National Recreation Area; Whatcom, Skagit and Chelan Counties, WA; Notice of Availability, 54378-54381 [2010-22144]
Download as PDF
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
54378
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices
(including armoring the base of the
slope in lieu of road realignment
options). The Scoping Report included
comments and agency responses as
appendices. On June 17, 2004, a notice
was sent to the 302-member project
mailing list regarding release of the
Scoping Report; additionally, a press
release was issued and a notice posted
on the Park website announcing
availability of the document. In April of
2005, a newsletter was sent to the
project mailing list summarizing
progress on the DEIS to date, including
the preliminary identification of a
preferred alternative, completion of a
Cultural Resource Survey and a Tunnel
Feasibility Study, and plans for rare
plant surveys. The project team made a
presentation summarizing planning to
date to the San Juan Board of County
Commissioners in January, 2006; the
meeting was open to the public. A plant
survey report was also completed
during January, 2006. Letters were sent
to culturally affiliated tribes on March 9,
2006, with copies of the Cultural
Resource Survey and inviting their
comments on the project. The FHWA,
on behalf of the project team, sent a
letter to the Washington State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) on May 28,
2009, with a recommendation of No
Adverse Effect and § 4(f) de minimis
determination. Concurrence was
received from the SHPO on June 23,
2009.
Proposal and Alternatives: Alternative
A: No Action—The existing use,
maintenance, and management
associated with the road would
continue without change. This
alternative provides a baseline of
current conditions to aid comparison
and analysis of the ‘‘action’’ alternatives.
Under this alternative, erosion
eventually could cause the road to fail,
disrupting vehicular access to
residential properties in the Cattle Point
Estates and Cape San Juan
neighborhoods and to public lands east
of the eroding bluff. Since
measurements began in 2002, erosion
has moved approximately 14 feet closer
to the guard rail and is currently 32 feet
from the guard rail at its closest point.
The continued life span of the road is
difficult to predict, however large storm
events could potentially make the road
unsafe in a few years—life expectancy
(relative to coastal erosion) is estimated
at approximately 100 years for each of
the ‘‘action’’ alternatives.
Alternative B: Hybrid Mid-Slope
Realignment—This alternative is the
‘‘agency preferred’’ alternative. It
involves mid-slope realignment to the
north of the existing road, traversing the
south-facing slope of Mt. Finlayson. At
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Sep 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
its highest point, this alignment curves
slightly south of the Mt. Finlayson
summit. The realignment would be
entirely on the surface (no tunnel),
approximately 4,950 feet in length, with
a short slope of 10.5% on the eastern
end. This also is deemed to be the
‘‘environmentally preferred’’ course of
action.
Alternative C: Long Tunnel on Minor
Realignment—This alternative involves
a short realignment (2,830 feet)
relatively low on the slope of Mt.
Finlayson. Sixteen hundred feet of the
realignment would be within a bored
tunnel. Maximum slope would be 7%.
Alternative D: Mid-Slope Alignment
with Short Tunnel—This alternative
involves mid-slope realignment to the
north of the existing road, utilizing a
short tunnel near the ridgeline of Mt.
Finlayson. Realignment length would be
4,700 feet, 775 feet of which would be
within the tunnel. Maximum slope
would be 8%.
Public Review and Comment: The
DEIS is now available for public review.
Copies may be obtained by contacting
the Park as noted below. Printed copies
of the document may also be reviewed
at these locations in Friday Harbor on
San Juan Island: San Juan County Public
Library, San Juan County Office of
Public Works, and at Park headquarters.
The document may also be reviewed at
Federal Highway Administration office
in Vancouver, Washington. All written
comments must be postmarked or
transmitted not later than 60 days from
the date of publication in the Federal
Register of the Environmental
Protection Agency’s notice of filing of
the DEIS—as soon as this date is
confirmed, it will be announced on the
project website and via local and
regional media.
During the review period, several
options are available for providing
written comments. Letters can be
directly mailed to: Superintendent Peter
Dederich, San Juan Island National
Historical Park, P.O. Box 429, Friday
Harbor, WA 98250. In addition,
comments may be hand-delivered at the
upcoming public workshop to be
conducted on San Juan Island.
Confirmed details on the date, location,
and time for the workshop will be
announced in local newspapers, in the
forthcoming DEIS Alternatives
newsletter, online at the Park Web site
(https://www.nps.gov/sajh), or may be
obtained via telephone at (360) 378–
2240. Comments may also be
transmitted electronically on the NPS
project Web site http//
parkplanning.nps.gov/sajh.
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.
Following the opportunity to review
the DEIS, all comments received will be
duly considered in preparing a Final
EIS. The Final EIS is expected to be
completed during the spring of 2011
and availability of the document will be
similarly announced in the Federal
Register and via local and regional press
media.
Dated: April 5, 2010.
Cicely A. Muldoon,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 2010–22145 Filed 9–3–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MS–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Draft Environmental Impact Statement;
Stehekin River Corridor
Implementation Plan; Lake Chelan
National Recreation Area; Whatcom,
Skagit and Chelan Counties, WA;
Notice of Availability
Summary: Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, the National Park Service, in
cooperation with the Federal Highway
Administration, has prepared a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and
Stehekin River Corridor Implementation
Plan (Plan/DEIS). The Plan/DEIS
evaluates four alternatives for
sustainable management of NPS
facilities (e.g., roads, maintenance yard,
trails, bridges) in response to flooding
and erosion issues on the lower
Stehekin River between High Bridge and
Lake Chelan, outside of the Stephen
Mather Wilderness. When approved, the
Plan will allow for implementation of
several actions identified in the 1995
General Management Plan (GMP),
including removal of NPS maintenance
and housing facilities and the primary
access road to North Cascades National
Park from the floodplain, construction
of new recreation facilities, and
protection of the water quality and
scenery along the lower Stehekin River.
The Plan/DEIS also updates the Lake
Chelan National Recreation Area Land
Protection Plan.
Background: Lake Chelan National
Recreation Area (LACH) encompasses
62,000 acres of the rugged North
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices
Cascade mountains. The focal point of
LACH is the Stehekin River, which
occupies a deep glacial valley on the
east slope of the range. The Stehekin
River is known for being flood prone
due to rapid runoff from steep, rocky
slopes and the location of its headwaters
on the wet Pacific Crest of the Cascade
Range. The Lower Stehekin valley
below High Bridge is particularly
vulnerable to flood and erosion damage
due to rapid decrease in stream energy
as the river flows through a widening
valley and empties into Lake Chelan.
Several key National Park Service
(NPS) facilities (fuel storage,
maintenance shops, and housing),
private development, and roads are in
the floodplain of the lower Stehekin
River and threatened by floods. Flood
conditions have become exacerbated by
a shift in the timing, magnitude, and
frequency of flooding on the Stehekin
River in the 1970s, away from smaller
spring floods to larger fall floods. This
shift has produced the three largest
floods since 1911 in the past 15 years.
Changes in the river channel have
resulted in threats to water quality and
scenery as several private cabins and
their sanitary systems have been
incorporated into the river.
This plan seeks to implement and
refine guidance from the 1995 GMP for
LACH that identified a new location for
administrative facilities outside of
regulatory floodplains. Locations for
expanded recreation opportunities
outside of designated wilderness within
the National Recreation Area were also
identified in this plan. The 1995 LACH
Land Protection Plan, scheduled to be
updated every two years, is the primary
means for the NPS to acquire private
cabins and associated water and
sanitary systems to prevent degradation
of water quality and scenic resources.
Given drastic changes in flood
conditions, this plan was in need of
revision.
Passage of the record floods in 2003
and 2006 led private landowners in the
valley to request U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (COE) advice on how to
reduce flooding. While the COE failed to
secure funds to do a detailed five-year
study, its emergency management team
recommended extensive bank hardening
with rock, and dredging of the river
channel. Estimated one-time cost is $12
million for removal of gravel deposited
since 2000 at two mile-long sites near
McGregor Meadows and the Stehekin
River mouth. The NPS finds the COE
recommendations to manipulate the
river contrary to the purpose and
significance of LACH. The potential for
major action by another agency and
continued placement of structures on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Sep 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
the Stehekin River by the NPS to protect
the road and private landowners to
protect property create the need to
assess cumulative impacts before new
actions are considered.
Surveys of channel topography (1972,
1990, 2004 and 2008) and position
(1959, 1962, 1978, 1982, 1995, 2004,
2007, and 2009), measurement of gravel
deposits (2007–08), hydrology data
collected since 1911, and large wood
surveys (conducted 1982, 2000, and
2007) provide the basis for development
of a scientifically credible plan and
impact analysis. Potential solutions for
all alternatives were reviewed by a
technical committee composed of
representatives for the Washington DOE
and DFW, Chelan PUD, Chelan County
Planning Department, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and a private
consultant.
Public involvement in the
conservation planning process began
with widespread mailing of a scoping
newsletter in early January 2008. Late in
January 2008, meetings in Stehekin,
Seattle, and Wenatchee provided an
opportunity for the public to identify
issues. Notice of Intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement was
published in the Federal Register on
February 27, 2008. A news release for
the public scoping meetings was sent in
February 14, 2008, to local and regional
news media (a follow up news release
on March 5, 2008, extended public
scoping to March 31). Following an NPS
alternative development workshop in
March 2008, a preliminary alternatives
newsletter was developed and mailed to
the public in summer 2008. This was
followed-up by a public open house in
Stehekin in August 2008. Both the
newsletter and open house were
announced via news releases to several
media outlets, including local
newspapers and radio and television
stations.
Purpose and Need for Federal Action:
Recent major floods and resultant
channel changes on the lower Stehekin
River are threatening NPS facilities and
natural resources within LACH. The
three largest recorded floods on the
Stehekin River have occurred within the
past 15 years, and in response the NPS
has spent more than $3 million to
protect public roads and facilities and to
repair flood damage since 2003. Roads,
visitor facilities and private homes once
thought to be safe from the river are now
threatened. Because of the current
impacts and future risks associated with
these unprecedented conditions, the
primary purpose of this implementation
plan is to enable the NPS to meet goals
and direction provided in the 1995
GMP, including:
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54379
(1) Sustainably operate and maintain
NPS administrative facilities, public
access (roads and trails), and
campgrounds; (2) Protect water quality,
scenic values, habitat, and natural
processes of the Stehekin River; and (3)
Ensure the persistence of visitor services
provided by the Stehekin community,
including those services and facilities
found on private lands.
The NPS and FHWA have identified
a need to evaluate comprehensive and
sustainable management strategies and
holistic actions to address the
consequences of flooding. This
implementation plan is needed to
address several interrelated issues,
including the following:
(1) Respond to the Increased
Magnitude and Frequency of Flooding.
Prior to the late 20th century, the
Stehekin River was prone primarily to
spring snowmelt flooding. Since the
1970s, however, the Stehekin River has
become prone to large fall rain-on-snow
floods, which rise quickly and occur
from mid-October through December.
Hydrologic data collected on the river
since 1911 confirm the statistical
significance of this shift, as analyzed by
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The
passage of severe floods in 1995, 2003,
and 2006 has led to significant changes
in the Stehekin River channel, and
redefined the boundaries for the 100year flood. As a result, recreational and
administrative facilities and
developments once thought to be safe
from the river are now threatened by
flooding and bank erosion, while other
sites in the floodplain have been
compromised by larger, more frequent
floods. Until now, the NPS has
addressed problems on a case-by-case
basis throughout the valley with the
passage of each of these large floods.
(2) Implement and Clarify 1995 Lake
Chelan National Recreation Area
General Management Plan Guidance.
The GMP provides broad management
guidance for LACH, as well as some
specific prescriptions to mitigate the
risks and consequences of flooding. As
a programmatic document, the GMP
lacks the specific management direction
needed to respond to the current
circumstances imposed by the recent
floods and the change to a fall flood
regime. Specific actions called for in the
GMP that would be implemented in this
plan include relocation of the
maintenance facility and new NPS
housing out of the floodplain, and
continued maintenance of vehicle
access on the Stehekin Valley and
Company Creek roads. This
implementation plan is needed to
inform the location, design,
construction, and implementation of
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
54380
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices
these actions. Guidance provided by the
GMP needs to be updated and clarified
to reflect the dramatic increase in
woody debris since 1995 and
recognition of the influence of Chelan
Public Utility District on the level of
Lake Chelan and the lower Stehekin
River. This plan is also needed to
evaluate and publicly disclose the
direct, indirect and cumulative impacts
of these actions on the resources and
values of Lake Chelan NRA.
(3) Sustain Public Facilities While
Protecting Natural Resources.
Management action is needed to provide
long-term use and access to
administrative and recreation facilities.
Despite erosion protection and flood
control efforts by the NPS and private
landowners, bank erosion continues to
threaten public and private property.
Channel changes have increased the rate
of erosion and frequency of flooding at
some sites, while decreasing erosion
rates at others. Integrated management
actions such as facility relocation, sitespecific bank hardening, and limited
manipulation of woody debris in the
Lake Chelan backwater zone now need
to be considered to ensure the long-term
sustainability of infrastructure and
protection of resources. Management of
large wood and proliferation of bank
protection measures have the potential
to impact Federal and state listed
species and to increase the spread of
non-native plants. These conditions
underscore the need for updated
assessment of erosion and flood
protection measures in the lower
Stehekin Valley.
(4) Manage Limited Funding. The NPS
has invested more than $3 million to
react to recent flood damage and new
threats on an event-by-event basis since
2003. A comprehensive and integrated
set of strategies and tactics to meet the
goals of the GMP and to mitigate the risk
and impacts from flooding is urgently
needed to enable the NPS to use limited
funds for the maximum benefit of
LACH. Without this comprehensive
approach, the NPS may be compelled to
continue reacting on a case-by-case
basis, which is more expensive and
could more adversely threaten natural
resources and public safety.
(5) Respond to Private Land-related
Concerns. Lake Chelan NRA includes
approximately 417 acres of private land,
much of which lies within the
floodplain and channel migration zone
of the Stehekin River. Developments at
McGregor Meadows and near the river
mouth are particularly vulnerable
because of their density and location in
particularly active reaches of the river.
These reaches, or sections of the river,
have extensive new gravel deposits and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Sep 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
rapidly growing logjams as a result of
recent flooding. The high monetary and
environmental costs of bank protection
and flood mitigation measures continue
to threaten private property and river
resources. At the river mouth,
accumulation of logs in the backwater
zone of Lake Chelan has led to deeper
flood water in parts of the floodplain.
Recent flooding has hastened channel
migration; damaged or destroyed several
cabins; incorporated debris and sanitary
systems (and occasional limited effluent
discharges) into the river; and increased
the flood risk to private lands
previously not threatened by flooding.
The NPS is concerned that these nonFederal circumstances could continue to
adversely affect LACH and Stehekin
River natural resources and values. The
primary means by which the NPS can
address this concern is via the Land
Protection Plan (LPP), which identifies
and prioritizes private lands for
acquisition or exchange from willing
sellers. Last updated in 1995, the LPP
needs to be amended to address new
river channel and floodplain conditions.
Proposed Plan and Alternatives: The
Plan/DEIS describes and analyzes three
‘‘action’’ alternatives, as well as
continuation of current management.
The three alternative management
strategies differ primarily because they
range from more removal of public
facilities and threatened private
developments from the channel
migration zone (preferred Alternative 2)
to less relocation and more dependence
on bank hardening and maintaining the
road in place (Alternative 4). Alternative
three represents a mix of actions in
Alternatives 2 and 4.
All of the alternatives have common
actions identified in the GMP, including
relocation of NPS maintenance and
some housing out of the channel
migration zone, resurfacing of the road
from Harlequin Bridge to mile 9.2 (just
above Stehekin valley Ranch), and
construction of a new trail system from
Stehekin Landing to High Bridge with a
connection to the river trail via a
footbridge over the river near the USGS
gage site. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would
add new campsites at different locations
to supplement sites at Harlequin Bridge
that are seasonally flooded.
Alternative 1 (continue current
management) and Alternative 4 would
keep the Stehekin valley road in place
through McGregor Meadows. To protect
the road from flood damage and to
ensure access to private residences for
emergencies during floods, about 6,000
cubic yards of fill would be placed in
the floodplain. In Alternative 4, as many
as 17 new rock barbs (rock structures
used to redirect flows) would be placed
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
along the river, with a similar number
anticipated over time in Alternative 1.
Alternatives 2 and 3 would relocate
1.9 miles of the Stehekin valley road
from the floodplain in McGregor
Meadows, while retaining private access
to the area via a 0.75 mile long reduced
maintenance road at grade. The
alternatives differ in where the reroute
returns to the existing road, with
Alternative 2 staying out of the channel
migration zone (CMZ) and Alternative 3
re-entering the CMZ at the Lower Field.
Implementation of Alternative 2 would
result in closure of the shooting range
near the Lower Field. Both Alternatives
2 and 3 reduce the number of barbs in
the river relative to alternatives 1 and 4
(7–8 new barbs in Alternative 2 and four
new barbs in Alternative 3).
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would revise
the LACH Land Protection Plan (LPP).
Alternatives 2 and 3 would focus more
on acquisition of private development
threatened by the river, and look to
cluster future development on areas
outside of the channel migration zone.
This represents a departure from the
1995 LPP, which placed a higher value
on scenic resources along the Stehekin
valley road. In Alternative 4, less
emphasis would be placed on
acquisition of development in the
floodplain, and far fewer private parcels
would be high priority for purchase or
exchange.
Comments: All written comments
must be postmarked or transmitted not
later than December 13, 2010 (this end
of comment period date will also be
posted on the project Web site, and
announced via local and regional press
media). All comments should be
addressed to: Superintendent, ATTN:
SRCIP/DEIS, North Cascades National
Park Service Complex, 810 State Route
20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284.
Comments may also be faxed to (360)
856–1934 or may be transmitted
electronically to https://
parkplanning.nps.gov/noca. The Plan/
DEIS will be mailed directly to all those
who requested a copy during public
scoping. Review copies will also be
available at park headquarters in SedroWoolley, the main visitor center in
Newhalem, and at the Golden West
Visitor center in Stehekin. To request a
printed copy or CD–ROM version of the
DEIS, phone (360) 856–5700 ext. 351.
The document will also be available for
downloading on the project Web site.
All comments received will be
maintained in the administrative record,
and are available for review at North
Cascades’ headquarters. Before
including your address, phone number,
e-mail address, or other personal
identifying information in your
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices
comments, 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.
To enhance the opportunity for public
information and commenting, public
meetings will be hosted at the following
Washington locations: October 19 in
Stehekin, October 20 in Wenatchee, and
October 21 Seattle. Confirmed meeting
times, specific locations and other
details will be announced via local and
regional news media and may be
obtained on the park’s Web site (https://
www.nps.gov/noca) or by phoning (360)
856–5700 ext.351. Participants are
strongly encouraged to review the
document prior to attending a meeting.
The Superintendent and planning team
members, including personnel from the
Technical Committee will attend all
meetings. The format will be the same
for each meeting, and will include a
brief presentation on the essential
elements of the Plan/DEIS and a
question and answer period. Oral and
written comments may also be
submitted. All meeting locations will be
accessible for disabled persons. A sign
language interpreter may be available
upon request with prior notice (please
contact the park as noted above).
Decision: Following due
consideration of all comments received
on the DEIS, preparation and release of
the Final EIS/Stehekin River Corridor
Implementation Plan is anticipated for
late summer 2010; availability will be
similarly announced in the Federal
Register. The actual date will depend
upon the degree of public interest and
response from agencies and
organizations. Following a minimum 30
days ‘‘no action’’ period, a Record of
Decision may be prepared; approval of
the plan will be similarly announced in
the Federal Register. This is tentatively
anticipated for late 2010. As a delegated
EIS the official responsible for the final
decision is the Regional Director, Pacific
West Region; subsequently the official
responsible for implementation of the
approved Stehekin River Corridor
Implementation Plan is the
Superintendent, North Cascades
National Park Service Complex.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:24 Sep 03, 2010
Jkt 220001
Dated: March 12, 2010.
Patricia L. Neubacher,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
54381
the libraries listed under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[FR Doc. 2010–22144 Filed 9–3–10; 8:45 am]
Barron Crawford, Project Leader, at
(406) 538–8706, or Laurie Shannon,
Planning Team Leader, (303) 236–4317;
laurie_shannon@fws.gov (e-mail).
BILLING CODE 4310–T6–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Editorial Note: This document was
received in the Office of the Federal Register
on August 31, 2010.
Introduction
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R6–R–2010–N078; 60138–1261–
6CCP–S3]
Charles M. Russell National Wildlife
Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife
Refuge, MT
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: Draft
comprehensive conservation plan and
draft environmental impact statement;
announcement of public meetings;
request for comments.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive
conservation plan (CCP) and draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS)
for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend
National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs,
Refuges) in Montana for public review
and comment. In these documents, we
describe alternatives, including our
proposed action, to manage these
refuges for the 15 years following
approval of the final CCP.
DATES: To ensure consideration, please
send your written comments by
November 8, 2010. We will announce
upcoming public meetings in local news
media, on our Web site, and by mail.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your
comments or a request for copies (hard
copies or a CD–ROM) or more
information by any of the following
methods:
Agency Web site: Download a copy of
the documents at https://www.fws.gov/
cmr/planning.
E-mail: cmrplanning@fws.gov. Include
‘‘Request copy of Charles M. Russell
NWR Draft CCP/EIS’’ in the subject line
of the message.
Mail: Charles M. Russell NWR CCP/
EIS, P.O. Box 110, Lewistown, MT
59457.
In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call
(406) 538–8706 to make an appointment
during regular business hours at Charles
M. Russell NWR Headquarters, Airport
Road, Lewistown, MT 59457.
Local Library or Libraries: The draft
documents are available for review at
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
With this notice, we continue the CCP
process for Charles M. Russell and UL
Bend NWRs. We started this process
through a notice in the Federal Register
(72 FR 68174, December 4, 2007).
Charles M. Russell and UL Bend
NWRs encompass nearly 1.1 million
acres, including Fort Peck Reservoir in
north central Montana. The Refuges
extend about 125 air miles west from
Fort Peck Dam to the western edge at
the boundary of the Upper Missouri
Breaks National Monument. UL Bend
NWR lies within Charles M. Russell
NWR. In essence, UL Bend is a refuge
within a refuge, and the two refuges are
managed as one unit and referred to as
Charles M. Russell NWR. Refuge habitat
includes native prairie, forested coulees,
river bottoms, and badlands. Wildlife is
as diverse as the topography and
includes Rocky Mountain elk, mule
deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn,
Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, sharptailed grouse, prairie dogs, and more
than 236 species of birds.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd–668ee) (Administration Act), as
amended by the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, requires us to develop a CCP for
each national wildlife refuge. The
purpose for developing a CCP is to
provide refuge managers with a 15-year
plan for achieving refuge purposes and
contributing toward the mission of the
National Wildlife Refuge System, which
is consistent with sound principles of
fish and wildlife management,
conservation, legal mandates, and our
policies. In addition to outlining broad
management direction on conserving
wildlife and their habitats, CCPs
identify wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities available to the public,
including opportunities for hunting,
fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, and environmental
education and interpretation. We will
review and update the CCP at least
every 15 years in accordance with the
Administration Act.
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 172 (Tuesday, September 7, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54378-54381]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22144]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Draft Environmental Impact Statement; Stehekin River Corridor
Implementation Plan; Lake Chelan National Recreation Area; Whatcom,
Skagit and Chelan Counties, WA; Notice of Availability
Summary: Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, the National Park Service, in cooperation with the
Federal Highway Administration, has prepared a Draft Environmental
Impact Statement and Stehekin River Corridor Implementation Plan (Plan/
DEIS). The Plan/DEIS evaluates four alternatives for sustainable
management of NPS facilities (e.g., roads, maintenance yard, trails,
bridges) in response to flooding and erosion issues on the lower
Stehekin River between High Bridge and Lake Chelan, outside of the
Stephen Mather Wilderness. When approved, the Plan will allow for
implementation of several actions identified in the 1995 General
Management Plan (GMP), including removal of NPS maintenance and housing
facilities and the primary access road to North Cascades National Park
from the floodplain, construction of new recreation facilities, and
protection of the water quality and scenery along the lower Stehekin
River. The Plan/DEIS also updates the Lake Chelan National Recreation
Area Land Protection Plan.
Background: Lake Chelan National Recreation Area (LACH) encompasses
62,000 acres of the rugged North
[[Page 54379]]
Cascade mountains. The focal point of LACH is the Stehekin River, which
occupies a deep glacial valley on the east slope of the range. The
Stehekin River is known for being flood prone due to rapid runoff from
steep, rocky slopes and the location of its headwaters on the wet
Pacific Crest of the Cascade Range. The Lower Stehekin valley below
High Bridge is particularly vulnerable to flood and erosion damage due
to rapid decrease in stream energy as the river flows through a
widening valley and empties into Lake Chelan.
Several key National Park Service (NPS) facilities (fuel storage,
maintenance shops, and housing), private development, and roads are in
the floodplain of the lower Stehekin River and threatened by floods.
Flood conditions have become exacerbated by a shift in the timing,
magnitude, and frequency of flooding on the Stehekin River in the
1970s, away from smaller spring floods to larger fall floods. This
shift has produced the three largest floods since 1911 in the past 15
years. Changes in the river channel have resulted in threats to water
quality and scenery as several private cabins and their sanitary
systems have been incorporated into the river.
This plan seeks to implement and refine guidance from the 1995 GMP
for LACH that identified a new location for administrative facilities
outside of regulatory floodplains. Locations for expanded recreation
opportunities outside of designated wilderness within the National
Recreation Area were also identified in this plan. The 1995 LACH Land
Protection Plan, scheduled to be updated every two years, is the
primary means for the NPS to acquire private cabins and associated
water and sanitary systems to prevent degradation of water quality and
scenic resources. Given drastic changes in flood conditions, this plan
was in need of revision.
Passage of the record floods in 2003 and 2006 led private
landowners in the valley to request U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
advice on how to reduce flooding. While the COE failed to secure funds
to do a detailed five-year study, its emergency management team
recommended extensive bank hardening with rock, and dredging of the
river channel. Estimated one-time cost is $12 million for removal of
gravel deposited since 2000 at two mile-long sites near McGregor
Meadows and the Stehekin River mouth. The NPS finds the COE
recommendations to manipulate the river contrary to the purpose and
significance of LACH. The potential for major action by another agency
and continued placement of structures on the Stehekin River by the NPS
to protect the road and private landowners to protect property create
the need to assess cumulative impacts before new actions are
considered.
Surveys of channel topography (1972, 1990, 2004 and 2008) and
position (1959, 1962, 1978, 1982, 1995, 2004, 2007, and 2009),
measurement of gravel deposits (2007-08), hydrology data collected
since 1911, and large wood surveys (conducted 1982, 2000, and 2007)
provide the basis for development of a scientifically credible plan and
impact analysis. Potential solutions for all alternatives were reviewed
by a technical committee composed of representatives for the Washington
DOE and DFW, Chelan PUD, Chelan County Planning Department, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, and a private consultant.
Public involvement in the conservation planning process began with
widespread mailing of a scoping newsletter in early January 2008. Late
in January 2008, meetings in Stehekin, Seattle, and Wenatchee provided
an opportunity for the public to identify issues. Notice of Intent to
prepare an environmental impact statement was published in the Federal
Register on February 27, 2008. A news release for the public scoping
meetings was sent in February 14, 2008, to local and regional news
media (a follow up news release on March 5, 2008, extended public
scoping to March 31). Following an NPS alternative development workshop
in March 2008, a preliminary alternatives newsletter was developed and
mailed to the public in summer 2008. This was followed-up by a public
open house in Stehekin in August 2008. Both the newsletter and open
house were announced via news releases to several media outlets,
including local newspapers and radio and television stations.
Purpose and Need for Federal Action: Recent major floods and
resultant channel changes on the lower Stehekin River are threatening
NPS facilities and natural resources within LACH. The three largest
recorded floods on the Stehekin River have occurred within the past 15
years, and in response the NPS has spent more than $3 million to
protect public roads and facilities and to repair flood damage since
2003. Roads, visitor facilities and private homes once thought to be
safe from the river are now threatened. Because of the current impacts
and future risks associated with these unprecedented conditions, the
primary purpose of this implementation plan is to enable the NPS to
meet goals and direction provided in the 1995 GMP, including:
(1) Sustainably operate and maintain NPS administrative facilities,
public access (roads and trails), and campgrounds; (2) Protect water
quality, scenic values, habitat, and natural processes of the Stehekin
River; and (3) Ensure the persistence of visitor services provided by
the Stehekin community, including those services and facilities found
on private lands.
The NPS and FHWA have identified a need to evaluate comprehensive
and sustainable management strategies and holistic actions to address
the consequences of flooding. This implementation plan is needed to
address several interrelated issues, including the following:
(1) Respond to the Increased Magnitude and Frequency of Flooding.
Prior to the late 20th century, the Stehekin River was prone primarily
to spring snowmelt flooding. Since the 1970s, however, the Stehekin
River has become prone to large fall rain-on-snow floods, which rise
quickly and occur from mid-October through December. Hydrologic data
collected on the river since 1911 confirm the statistical significance
of this shift, as analyzed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The
passage of severe floods in 1995, 2003, and 2006 has led to significant
changes in the Stehekin River channel, and redefined the boundaries for
the 100-year flood. As a result, recreational and administrative
facilities and developments once thought to be safe from the river are
now threatened by flooding and bank erosion, while other sites in the
floodplain have been compromised by larger, more frequent floods. Until
now, the NPS has addressed problems on a case-by-case basis throughout
the valley with the passage of each of these large floods.
(2) Implement and Clarify 1995 Lake Chelan National Recreation Area
General Management Plan Guidance. The GMP provides broad management
guidance for LACH, as well as some specific prescriptions to mitigate
the risks and consequences of flooding. As a programmatic document, the
GMP lacks the specific management direction needed to respond to the
current circumstances imposed by the recent floods and the change to a
fall flood regime. Specific actions called for in the GMP that would be
implemented in this plan include relocation of the maintenance facility
and new NPS housing out of the floodplain, and continued maintenance of
vehicle access on the Stehekin Valley and Company Creek roads. This
implementation plan is needed to inform the location, design,
construction, and implementation of
[[Page 54380]]
these actions. Guidance provided by the GMP needs to be updated and
clarified to reflect the dramatic increase in woody debris since 1995
and recognition of the influence of Chelan Public Utility District on
the level of Lake Chelan and the lower Stehekin River. This plan is
also needed to evaluate and publicly disclose the direct, indirect and
cumulative impacts of these actions on the resources and values of Lake
Chelan NRA.
(3) Sustain Public Facilities While Protecting Natural Resources.
Management action is needed to provide long-term use and access to
administrative and recreation facilities. Despite erosion protection
and flood control efforts by the NPS and private landowners, bank
erosion continues to threaten public and private property. Channel
changes have increased the rate of erosion and frequency of flooding at
some sites, while decreasing erosion rates at others. Integrated
management actions such as facility relocation, site-specific bank
hardening, and limited manipulation of woody debris in the Lake Chelan
backwater zone now need to be considered to ensure the long-term
sustainability of infrastructure and protection of resources.
Management of large wood and proliferation of bank protection measures
have the potential to impact Federal and state listed species and to
increase the spread of non-native plants. These conditions underscore
the need for updated assessment of erosion and flood protection
measures in the lower Stehekin Valley.
(4) Manage Limited Funding. The NPS has invested more than $3
million to react to recent flood damage and new threats on an event-by-
event basis since 2003. A comprehensive and integrated set of
strategies and tactics to meet the goals of the GMP and to mitigate the
risk and impacts from flooding is urgently needed to enable the NPS to
use limited funds for the maximum benefit of LACH. Without this
comprehensive approach, the NPS may be compelled to continue reacting
on a case-by-case basis, which is more expensive and could more
adversely threaten natural resources and public safety.
(5) Respond to Private Land-related Concerns. Lake Chelan NRA
includes approximately 417 acres of private land, much of which lies
within the floodplain and channel migration zone of the Stehekin River.
Developments at McGregor Meadows and near the river mouth are
particularly vulnerable because of their density and location in
particularly active reaches of the river. These reaches, or sections of
the river, have extensive new gravel deposits and rapidly growing
logjams as a result of recent flooding. The high monetary and
environmental costs of bank protection and flood mitigation measures
continue to threaten private property and river resources. At the river
mouth, accumulation of logs in the backwater zone of Lake Chelan has
led to deeper flood water in parts of the floodplain. Recent flooding
has hastened channel migration; damaged or destroyed several cabins;
incorporated debris and sanitary systems (and occasional limited
effluent discharges) into the river; and increased the flood risk to
private lands previously not threatened by flooding. The NPS is
concerned that these non-Federal circumstances could continue to
adversely affect LACH and Stehekin River natural resources and values.
The primary means by which the NPS can address this concern is via the
Land Protection Plan (LPP), which identifies and prioritizes private
lands for acquisition or exchange from willing sellers. Last updated in
1995, the LPP needs to be amended to address new river channel and
floodplain conditions.
Proposed Plan and Alternatives: The Plan/DEIS describes and
analyzes three ``action'' alternatives, as well as continuation of
current management. The three alternative management strategies differ
primarily because they range from more removal of public facilities and
threatened private developments from the channel migration zone
(preferred Alternative 2) to less relocation and more dependence on
bank hardening and maintaining the road in place (Alternative 4).
Alternative three represents a mix of actions in Alternatives 2 and 4.
All of the alternatives have common actions identified in the GMP,
including relocation of NPS maintenance and some housing out of the
channel migration zone, resurfacing of the road from Harlequin Bridge
to mile 9.2 (just above Stehekin valley Ranch), and construction of a
new trail system from Stehekin Landing to High Bridge with a connection
to the river trail via a footbridge over the river near the USGS gage
site. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would add new campsites at different
locations to supplement sites at Harlequin Bridge that are seasonally
flooded.
Alternative 1 (continue current management) and Alternative 4 would
keep the Stehekin valley road in place through McGregor Meadows. To
protect the road from flood damage and to ensure access to private
residences for emergencies during floods, about 6,000 cubic yards of
fill would be placed in the floodplain. In Alternative 4, as many as 17
new rock barbs (rock structures used to redirect flows) would be placed
along the river, with a similar number anticipated over time in
Alternative 1.
Alternatives 2 and 3 would relocate 1.9 miles of the Stehekin
valley road from the floodplain in McGregor Meadows, while retaining
private access to the area via a 0.75 mile long reduced maintenance
road at grade. The alternatives differ in where the reroute returns to
the existing road, with Alternative 2 staying out of the channel
migration zone (CMZ) and Alternative 3 re-entering the CMZ at the Lower
Field. Implementation of Alternative 2 would result in closure of the
shooting range near the Lower Field. Both Alternatives 2 and 3 reduce
the number of barbs in the river relative to alternatives 1 and 4 (7-8
new barbs in Alternative 2 and four new barbs in Alternative 3).
Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would revise the LACH Land Protection Plan
(LPP). Alternatives 2 and 3 would focus more on acquisition of private
development threatened by the river, and look to cluster future
development on areas outside of the channel migration zone. This
represents a departure from the 1995 LPP, which placed a higher value
on scenic resources along the Stehekin valley road. In Alternative 4,
less emphasis would be placed on acquisition of development in the
floodplain, and far fewer private parcels would be high priority for
purchase or exchange.
Comments: All written comments must be postmarked or transmitted
not later than December 13, 2010 (this end of comment period date will
also be posted on the project Web site, and announced via local and
regional press media). All comments should be addressed to:
Superintendent, ATTN: SRCIP/DEIS, North Cascades National Park Service
Complex, 810 State Route 20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284. Comments may also
be faxed to (360) 856-1934 or may be transmitted electronically to
https://parkplanning.nps.gov/noca. The Plan/DEIS will be mailed directly
to all those who requested a copy during public scoping. Review copies
will also be available at park headquarters in Sedro-Woolley, the main
visitor center in Newhalem, and at the Golden West Visitor center in
Stehekin. To request a printed copy or CD-ROM version of the DEIS,
phone (360) 856-5700 ext. 351. The document will also be available for
downloading on the project Web site.
All comments received will be maintained in the administrative
record, and are available for review at North Cascades' headquarters.
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
[[Page 54381]]
comments, 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.
To enhance the opportunity for public information and commenting,
public meetings will be hosted at the following Washington locations:
October 19 in Stehekin, October 20 in Wenatchee, and October 21
Seattle. Confirmed meeting times, specific locations and other details
will be announced via local and regional news media and may be obtained
on the park's Web site (https://www.nps.gov/noca) or by phoning (360)
856-5700 ext.351. Participants are strongly encouraged to review the
document prior to attending a meeting. The Superintendent and planning
team members, including personnel from the Technical Committee will
attend all meetings. The format will be the same for each meeting, and
will include a brief presentation on the essential elements of the
Plan/DEIS and a question and answer period. Oral and written comments
may also be submitted. All meeting locations will be accessible for
disabled persons. A sign language interpreter may be available upon
request with prior notice (please contact the park as noted above).
Decision: Following due consideration of all comments received on
the DEIS, preparation and release of the Final EIS/Stehekin River
Corridor Implementation Plan is anticipated for late summer 2010;
availability will be similarly announced in the Federal Register. The
actual date will depend upon the degree of public interest and response
from agencies and organizations. Following a minimum 30 days ``no
action'' period, a Record of Decision may be prepared; approval of the
plan will be similarly announced in the Federal Register. This is
tentatively anticipated for late 2010. As a delegated EIS the official
responsible for the final decision is the Regional Director, Pacific
West Region; subsequently the official responsible for implementation
of the approved Stehekin River Corridor Implementation Plan is the
Superintendent, North Cascades National Park Service Complex.
Dated: March 12, 2010.
Patricia L. Neubacher,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
Editorial Note: This document was received in the Office of the
Federal Register on August 31, 2010.
[FR Doc. 2010-22144 Filed 9-3-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-T6-P