Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permits; Joint Supplemental Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement, Riverside County, CA, 17666-17668 [2011-7420]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
17666
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
implementation of the following
mitigation measures (see the IPHCP for
additional details about these
measures):
• To the maximum extent feasible,
the City and County will require that
any revegetation or landscaping
activities associated with Covered
Activities are conducted using locally
derived source material (i.e., seeds or
cuttings) of plant species native to the
Sandhills, with particular emphasis on
the plant species identified in Appendix
F of the IPHCP.
• Prior to beginning any grounddisturbing activities, the impacts of
Covered Activities must be mitigated in
one of the following ways: (1) The
landowner must secure conservation
credits for the Mount Hermon June
beetle at a ratio of 1:1 in terms of acres
of disturbance to numbers of credits
(e.g., a project with a 0.1-acre
disturbance envelope will mitigate by
securing 0.1 acre of conservation credits
for the Mount Hermon June beetle) at
the Zayante Sandhills Conservation
Bank; or (2) The landowner must secure
conservation credits for the Mount
Hermon June beetle at a ratio of 1:1 in
terms of acres of disturbance to numbers
of credits (e.g., a project with a 0.1-acre
disturbance envelope will mitigate by
securing 0.1 acre of conservation credits
for the Mount Hermon June beetle) at
another Service-approved conservation
bank; this bank must also have an
Operating Agreement with the County if
the parcel is within the County’s
jurisdiction.
Environmental Assessment (EA)
The Draft EA considers the effects on
the human environment of: (1) Our
proposed action of issuing ITPs to the
City and County based on the IPHCP,
(2) a Reduced-Take Alternative to the
proposed action, and (3) No Action
Alternative. Under the Reduced-Take
Alternative, we would propose to issue
ITPs to the City and County where the
total amount of development that would
be covered under the IPHCP and related
ITPs would be 100 acres, instead of 139
acres as is currently proposed. The
maximum disturbance footprint would
remain at 15,000 square feet (0.34 acre)
per parcel. The boundaries of the 10
project units would remain unchanged
as would the minimization and
mitigation measures of the IPHCP’s
operating conservation plan. Under the
No Action Alternative, the Service
would not issue ITPs for the Mount
Hermon June beetle to the City and
County; thus, private landowners within
the IPHCP area would have to apply to
the Service individually to obtain an
ITP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Mar 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
Request for Comments
We are requesting comments on our
preliminary determination that the
proposed project will not have
significant effects on the environment,
and suggestions for issues we should
consider in our analysis. The Service
will use the EA to determine whether its
decision can result in a Finding of No
Significant Impact (FONSI) or if an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
must be prepared.
Based on our review of public
comments that we receive in response to
this notice, we may revise this
preliminary determination.
Public Availability of Comments
Please direct any comments to the
Service contact listed above in the
ADDRESSES section, and any questions to
the Service contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
All comments and materials we receive,
including names and addresses, will
become part of the administrative record
and may be released to the public.
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.
Next Steps
We will evaluate the IPHCP and
comments we receive to determine
whether the permit applications meet
the requirements of section 10(a) of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and
complete our compliance with NEPA. If
we determine that the applications meet
these requirements, we will issue the
permits for incidental take of the Mount
Hermon June beetle. We will also
evaluate whether issuance of section
10(a)(1)(B) permits would comply with
section 7 of the Act by conducting an
intra-Service section 7 consultation. We
will use the results of this consultation,
in combination with the above findings,
in our final analysis to determine
whether or not to issue a permit. If the
requirements are met, we will issue the
permits to the applicants.
Authority
Frm 00050
[FR Doc. 2011–7426 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R8–ES–2011–N010; 1112–0000–
80221–F2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Permits; Joint
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact
Statement, Riverside County, CA
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), in coordination with
the Coachella Valley Conservation
Commission (CVCC), are gathering
information necessary for the
preparation of a joint Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report/
Environmental Impact Statement
(Supplemental EIR/EIS) under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). This is a Supplemental EIR/EIS
to the approved and certified September
2007 Final Recirculated EIR/EIS for the
Coachella Valley Multiple Species
Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan, or
CVMSHCP). The Supplemental EIR/EIS
will consider the environmental effects
associated with the issuance of an
amended permit for the CVMSHCP,
adding the City of Desert Hot Springs
(City) and Mission Springs Water
District (MSWD) as permittees under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act),
as amended.We are furnishing this
notice to announce the initiation of a
public scoping period, during which we
invite other agencies, Tribes, and
interested persons to provide comments
to identify and discuss the scope of
issues and alternatives that should be
addressed in the Supplemental EIR/EIS.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by 5 p.m. on April 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mr. Jim
A. Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, 6010 Hidden
Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA
92011. Alternatively, you may submit
comments by facsimile to (760) 918–
0638.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
We provide this notice under section
10 of the Act (U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and
NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
PO 00000
Dated: March 24, 2011.
Paul B McKim,
Acting Deputy Regional Director, Pacific
Southwest Region, Sacramento, CA.
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Carol Roberts, Division Chief, Coachella
and Imperial Valleys (see ADDRESSES),
telephone (760) 431–9440.
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Notices
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In accordance with section 10(a)(2)(A)
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), the Coachella Valley Conservation
Commission (CVCC) is preparing a
proposed habitat conservation plan
(HCP) in support of an application for
an amended permit from the Service to
incidentally take listed species. Section
9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1538) and its
implementing regulations prohibit the
take of animal species listed as
endangered or threatened. The term
‘‘take’’ is defined under the ESA (16
U.S.C. 1532) as to harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture,
or collect or attempt to engage in such
conduct. ‘‘Harm’’ is defined in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) by Service
regulations at 50 CFR 17.3 to include
significant habitat modification or
degradation where it actually kills or
injures wildlife by significantly
impairing essential behavior patterns,
including breeding, feeding, or
sheltering. In certain circumstances,
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, we
may issue permits to authorize
‘‘incidental take’’ of listed species.
‘‘Incidental take’’ is defined by the ESA
as take that is incidental to, and not the
purpose of, carrying out an otherwise
lawful activity. Regulations governing
permits for threatened and endangered
species are found at 50 CFR 17.32 and
50 CFR 17.22, respectively. Take of
listed plant species on non-Federal
lands is not prohibited under the ESA,
and authorization under an ESA section
10 permit is not required. However,
plant species may be included on a
permit in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided for them
under the HCP. If the permit is issued,
the CVCC would receive assurances for
all species included on the incidental
take permit under the Service’s ‘‘No
Surprises’’ regulations (50 CFR 17.22
(b)(5) and 17.32 (b)(5)).
Section 10 of the ESA specifies the
requirements for the issuance of
incidental take permits to non-Federal
entities. Any proposed take must be
incidental to otherwise lawful activities
and must not appreciably reduce the
likelihood of the survival and recovery
of the species in the wild. The impacts
of such take must also be minimized
and mitigated to the maximum extent
practicable. To obtain an incidental take
permit, an applicant must prepare a
HCP describing the impact that would
likely result from the proposed taking,
the measures for minimizing and
mitigating the take, the funding
available to implement such measures,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Mar 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
alternatives to the taking, and the reason
why such alternatives are not being
implemented.
In February 2006, the Final
CVMSHCP and associated Final EIR/EIS
were released for review and approval
by the participating jurisdictions and
agencies as part of the application
process to support the issuance of take
authorizations by the Service (April 1,
2006, 71 FR 20719). However, in June
2006, the City voted not to approve the
Plan. Subsequently, the Coachella
Valley Association of Governments
(CVAG) Executive Committee rescinded
its approval of the Plan and directed
that Desert Hot Springs be removed as
a Permittee. The CVAG prepared and
recirculated a revised Plan and
associated EIR/EIS, which removed the
City and made other modifications
consistent with direction from the
CVAG Executive Committee (March 30,
2007, 72 FR 15148).
The revised and recirculated
CVMSHCP was approved and the
associated Final Recirculated EIR/EIS
was certified by CVAG and the CVCC in
September 2007 and subsequently by all
local Permittees by the end of October
2007. The State Permittees (Caltrans,
CVMC, and California State Parks)
approved the Plan and signed the
Implementing Agreement as of March
2008. The Final Recirculated
CVMSHCP, which did not include the
City, received final State and Federal
permits on September 9 and October 1,
2008, respectively.
However, in a reversal of their June
2006 decision to optout of the Plan, the
City Council reconsidered their decision
and unanimously approved a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
in October 2007, stating the parties’
mutual intent to enter into negotiations
for the City to join the CVMSHCP as a
Permittee. The MOU was subsequently
approved by the CVCC, CVAG, and the
County of Riverside as of February 2008.
Subsequent to the City’s decision, the
MSWD has also made the decision to
join the CVMSHCP as a Permittee, and
the addition of both entities as
Permittees will be evaluated in the
Supplemental EIR/EIS.
The Amendment to reinstate the City
proposes that the Plan provisions and
boundaries will be based on the
February 2006 CVMSHCP, with
modifications as described in the
September 2007 Final Recirculated
CVMSHCP to provide for the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District’s future flood
control facility. The current Plan
boundaries would be amended to
include all of the private lands within
the City limits and restore the original
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17667
boundaries of the Upper Mission Creek/
Big Morongo Canyon and Whitewater
Canyon Conservation Areas within City
limits. Adding the City as a Permittee
requires a Major Amendment to the
CVMSHCP in accordance with the
requirements outlined in Section 6.12.4
of the Plan. The procedures outlined in
Section 6.12.4 state that Major
Amendments require the same process
to be followed as for the original
CVMSHCP approval, including
California Environmental Quality Act
and NEPA compliance. In addition,
MSWD, not previously a participating
agency, has also opted to join the
CVMSHCP as a Permittee. MSWD and
the City have proposed that a number of
infrastructure projects be included as
Covered Activities under the Plan.
Covered Activities include certain
activities carried out or conducted by
Permittees, which receive take
authorization under an USFWS section
10(a)(1)(B) permit and a State Natural
Community Conservation Planning
Permit, provided these activities are
otherwise lawful. Details of the
proposed Covered Activities for an
amended permit will be provided in the
amended CVMHCP and Supplemental
EIR/EIS.
Environmental Impact Statement
Prior to issuing an amendment to the
permit, we will prepare a draft
Supplemental EIR/EIS to analyze the
environmental impacts associated with
the issuance of the requested permit
amendment and the implementation of
the amended CVMSHCP by the City and
the MSWD. The Fish and Wildlife
Service is the NEPA lead for the
Supplemental EIR/EIS, and we are
responsible for the scope and content of
the document. The Supplemental EIR/
EIS will consider the proposed action,
the issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(B)
permit amendment under the ESA, No
Action (no permit amendment), and a
reasonable range of alternatives. A
detailed description of the impacts of
the proposed action and each alternative
will be included in the Supplemental
EIR/EIS.
The proposed action and alternatives
will be evaluated against the No Action
alternative, which assumes that no
permit amendment will be issued. A
range of alternatives will be considered
and analyzed, representing varying
levels of conservation and impacts. The
alternatives to be considered for
analysis in the Supplemental EIR/EIS
may include: Variations in the scope of
covered activities; variations in the
location, amount, and type of
conservation; variations in permit
duration; or a combination of these
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
17668
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Notices
elements. The Supplemental EIR/EIS
will also identify potentially significant
direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts
on biological resources, land use, air
quality, water quality, water resources,
and socioeconomics, along with other
environmental issues that could occur
with the implementation of the
proposed actions and alternatives. For
all potentially significant impacts, the
Supplemental EIR/EIS will identify
avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation measures to reduce these
impacts, where feasible, to a level below
significance.
Public Comments
Please direct any comments to the
Service contact listed above in the
ADDRESSES section, and any questions to
the Service contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
All comments and materials received,
including names and addresses, will
become part of the administrative record
and may be released to the public.
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.
Authority: This notice is provided under
section 10(a) of the ESA and Service
regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR
1506.6).
Dated: March 24, 2011.
Paul McKim,
Acting Deputy Regional Director, Pacific
Southwest Region, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. 2011–7420 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
[L51010000–FX0000–LVRWA09A2590–
LLAZC02000; AZA34666]
Notice of Intent To Prepare a Possible
Land Use Plan Amendment in
Conjunction With the Proposed
Quartzsite Solar Energy Project, La
Paz County, AZ
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
AGENCY:
In compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:59 Mar 29, 2011
Jkt 223001
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976, as amended, the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), Yuma Field
Office, Yuma, Arizona, proposes to
amend the Yuma Resource Management
Plan (RMP), in conjunction with the
Quartzsite Solar Energy Project (QSEP),
and by this notice is announcing the
beginning of the scoping process to
solicit public comments and identify
issues associated with the proposed
RMP amendment.
DATES: This notice initiates the public
scoping process for the proposed
amendment. To be fully considered in
the planning process, comments must
be submitted in writing by April 29,
2011. The date(s) and location(s) of all
scoping meetings will be announced at
least 15 days in advance of the
meeting(s) through local media and the
following BLM Web site at: https://
www.blm.gov/az/st/en.html. The BLM
will provide additional opportunities
for public participation upon
publication of the draft planning
document.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
related to the plan amendment proposal
by any of the following methods:
• Web site: https://www.blm.gov/az/st/
en.html.
• E-mail: Quartzsite_Solar@blm.gov.
• Fax: 928–317–3250.
• Mail: Quartzsite Solar Energy
Project, BLM, Yuma Field Office,
Attention: Eddie Arreola, Supervisory
Project Manager, 2555 East Gila Ridge
Road, Yuma, Arizona 85365.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Eddie Arreola, Supervisory Project
Manager, telephone 602–417–9505;
e-mail eddie_arreola@blm.gov; address
One North Central Avenue, Suite 800,
Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Quartzsite
Solar Energy LLC (QSE), a wholly
owned subsidiary of Solar Reserve LLC,
has requested a right-of-way
authorization from the BLM to
construct, operate, and maintain a 100megawatt solar energy generation
facility on 1,450 acres using
concentrated solar power tower
technology and has also applied for the
approval of the Western Area Power
Administration (WAPA) to interconnect
the facility’s electric grid system into
WAPA’s existing 230 kilovolt
transmission line paralleling State Route
95. QSE’s proposed project is
approximately 10 miles north of the
Town of Quartzsite and approximately 1
mile to the east of State Route 95.
WAPA, as the lead agency under NEPA
for the project, published a Notice of
Intent to prepare an environmental
impact statement (EIS) for the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
project in the Federal Register on
January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2133). Public
scoping meetings on the QSE project EIS
were held on January 26, 2010, in
Yuma, Arizona; January 27, 2010, in
Parker, Arizona; and January 28, 2010,
in Quartzsite, Arizona. The BLM is a
cooperating agency for this EIS.
Preliminary environmental analysis
by the BLM has determined that QSE’s
proposed project tower is in nonconformance with the Yuma RMP’s
Visual Resources Management (VRM)
Class III management objectives.
Authorization of the solar facility may
therefore require an amendment to the
Yuma RMP.
By this notice, the BLM is complying
with requirements in 43 CFR 1610.2(c)
to notify the public of potential
amendments to land use plans,
predicated on the findings of the NEPA
analysis. The BLM will coordinate the
RMP commenting process to satisfy the
public involvement process under
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f)), as
provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3).
Native American tribal consultations
will be conducted in accordance with
policy, and tribal concerns, including
impacts on Indian trust assets, will be
given due consideration.
The purpose of this public scoping
process is to determine relevant issues
that will influence the scope of the
environmental analysis as it relates to
the potential RMP amendment,
including alternatives, and guide the
process for developing the relevant
NEPA analyses. At present, the BLM has
identified the following preliminary
issues, among others: Air quality,
geologic resources, soils, water
resources, threatened and endangered
species, wildlife habitats, cultural and
historical resources, paleontological
resources, visual resources, land use,
recreational resources, and public
health and safety. Federal, State, and
local agencies, along with other
stakeholders that may be interested or
affected by the BLM’s decision on this
project, are invited to participate in the
scoping process and, if eligible, may
request or be requested by the BLM to
participate as a cooperating agency for
the development of the RMP
amendment.
The NEPA document analyzing the
RMP amendment will consider the
impacts of the proposed action,
alternatives, and the no action
alternative. The BLM, as a cooperating
agency for the project EIS, will work to
coordinate the analysis associated with
the RMP amendment with the project
EIS. The public is invited to submit
comments on the possible amendment
E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM
30MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17666-17668]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-7420]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-ES-2011-N010; 1112-0000-80221-F2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permits; Joint
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact
Statement, Riverside County, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), in coordination
with the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC), are gathering
information necessary for the preparation of a joint Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement
(Supplemental EIR/EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). This is a Supplemental EIR/EIS to the approved and certified
September 2007 Final Recirculated EIR/EIS for the Coachella Valley
Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan, or CVMSHCP). The
Supplemental EIR/EIS will consider the environmental effects associated
with the issuance of an amended permit for the CVMSHCP, adding the City
of Desert Hot Springs (City) and Mission Springs Water District (MSWD)
as permittees under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as
amended.We are furnishing this notice to announce the initiation of a
public scoping period, during which we invite other agencies, Tribes,
and interested persons to provide comments to identify and discuss the
scope of issues and alternatives that should be addressed in the
Supplemental EIR/EIS.
DATES: Written comments must be received by 5 p.m. on April 29, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mr. Jim A. Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101,
Carlsbad, CA 92011. Alternatively, you may submit comments by facsimile
to (760) 918-0638.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Roberts, Division Chief,
Coachella and Imperial Valleys (see ADDRESSES), telephone (760) 431-
9440.
[[Page 17667]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In accordance with section 10(a)(2)(A) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), the Coachella
Valley Conservation Commission (CVCC) is preparing a proposed habitat
conservation plan (HCP) in support of an application for an amended
permit from the Service to incidentally take listed species. Section 9
of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1538) and its implementing regulations prohibit
the take of animal species listed as endangered or threatened. The term
``take'' is defined under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532) as to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or attempt
to engage in such conduct. ``Harm'' is defined in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) by Service regulations at 50 CFR 17.3 to include
significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills
or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavior
patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering. In certain
circumstances, under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA, we may issue
permits to authorize ``incidental take'' of listed species.
``Incidental take'' is defined by the ESA as take that is incidental
to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity.
Regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are
found at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22, respectively. Take of listed
plant species on non-Federal lands is not prohibited under the ESA, and
authorization under an ESA section 10 permit is not required. However,
plant species may be included on a permit in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided for them under the HCP. If the permit is
issued, the CVCC would receive assurances for all species included on
the incidental take permit under the Service's ``No Surprises''
regulations (50 CFR 17.22 (b)(5) and 17.32 (b)(5)).
Section 10 of the ESA specifies the requirements for the issuance
of incidental take permits to non-Federal entities. Any proposed take
must be incidental to otherwise lawful activities and must not
appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the
species in the wild. The impacts of such take must also be minimized
and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable. To obtain an
incidental take permit, an applicant must prepare a HCP describing the
impact that would likely result from the proposed taking, the measures
for minimizing and mitigating the take, the funding available to
implement such measures, alternatives to the taking, and the reason why
such alternatives are not being implemented.
In February 2006, the Final CVMSHCP and associated Final EIR/EIS
were released for review and approval by the participating
jurisdictions and agencies as part of the application process to
support the issuance of take authorizations by the Service (April 1,
2006, 71 FR 20719). However, in June 2006, the City voted not to
approve the Plan. Subsequently, the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG) Executive Committee rescinded its approval of the
Plan and directed that Desert Hot Springs be removed as a Permittee.
The CVAG prepared and recirculated a revised Plan and associated EIR/
EIS, which removed the City and made other modifications consistent
with direction from the CVAG Executive Committee (March 30, 2007, 72 FR
15148).
The revised and recirculated CVMSHCP was approved and the
associated Final Recirculated EIR/EIS was certified by CVAG and the
CVCC in September 2007 and subsequently by all local Permittees by the
end of October 2007. The State Permittees (Caltrans, CVMC, and
California State Parks) approved the Plan and signed the Implementing
Agreement as of March 2008. The Final Recirculated CVMSHCP, which did
not include the City, received final State and Federal permits on
September 9 and October 1, 2008, respectively.
However, in a reversal of their June 2006 decision to optout of the
Plan, the City Council reconsidered their decision and unanimously
approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in October 2007, stating
the parties' mutual intent to enter into negotiations for the City to
join the CVMSHCP as a Permittee. The MOU was subsequently approved by
the CVCC, CVAG, and the County of Riverside as of February 2008.
Subsequent to the City's decision, the MSWD has also made the decision
to join the CVMSHCP as a Permittee, and the addition of both entities
as Permittees will be evaluated in the Supplemental EIR/EIS.
The Amendment to reinstate the City proposes that the Plan
provisions and boundaries will be based on the February 2006 CVMSHCP,
with modifications as described in the September 2007 Final
Recirculated CVMSHCP to provide for the Riverside County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District's future flood control facility. The
current Plan boundaries would be amended to include all of the private
lands within the City limits and restore the original boundaries of the
Upper Mission Creek/Big Morongo Canyon and Whitewater Canyon
Conservation Areas within City limits. Adding the City as a Permittee
requires a Major Amendment to the CVMSHCP in accordance with the
requirements outlined in Section 6.12.4 of the Plan. The procedures
outlined in Section 6.12.4 state that Major Amendments require the same
process to be followed as for the original CVMSHCP approval, including
California Environmental Quality Act and NEPA compliance. In addition,
MSWD, not previously a participating agency, has also opted to join the
CVMSHCP as a Permittee. MSWD and the City have proposed that a number
of infrastructure projects be included as Covered Activities under the
Plan. Covered Activities include certain activities carried out or
conducted by Permittees, which receive take authorization under an
USFWS section 10(a)(1)(B) permit and a State Natural Community
Conservation Planning Permit, provided these activities are otherwise
lawful. Details of the proposed Covered Activities for an amended
permit will be provided in the amended CVMHCP and Supplemental EIR/EIS.
Environmental Impact Statement
Prior to issuing an amendment to the permit, we will prepare a
draft Supplemental EIR/EIS to analyze the environmental impacts
associated with the issuance of the requested permit amendment and the
implementation of the amended CVMSHCP by the City and the MSWD. The
Fish and Wildlife Service is the NEPA lead for the Supplemental EIR/
EIS, and we are responsible for the scope and content of the document.
The Supplemental EIR/EIS will consider the proposed action, the
issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit amendment under the ESA, No
Action (no permit amendment), and a reasonable range of alternatives. A
detailed description of the impacts of the proposed action and each
alternative will be included in the Supplemental EIR/EIS.
The proposed action and alternatives will be evaluated against the
No Action alternative, which assumes that no permit amendment will be
issued. A range of alternatives will be considered and analyzed,
representing varying levels of conservation and impacts. The
alternatives to be considered for analysis in the Supplemental EIR/EIS
may include: Variations in the scope of covered activities; variations
in the location, amount, and type of conservation; variations in permit
duration; or a combination of these
[[Page 17668]]
elements. The Supplemental EIR/EIS will also identify potentially
significant direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts on biological
resources, land use, air quality, water quality, water resources, and
socioeconomics, along with other environmental issues that could occur
with the implementation of the proposed actions and alternatives. For
all potentially significant impacts, the Supplemental EIR/EIS will
identify avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures to reduce
these impacts, where feasible, to a level below significance.
Public Comments
Please direct any comments to the Service contact listed above in
the ADDRESSES section, and any questions to the Service contact listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. All comments and
materials received, including names and addresses, will become part of
the administrative record and may be released to the public. 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.
Authority: This notice is provided under section 10(a) of the
ESA and Service regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR 1506.6).
Dated: March 24, 2011.
Paul McKim,
Acting Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento,
California.
[FR Doc. 2011-7420 Filed 3-29-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
