Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties, CA, 21397-21398 [2013-08338]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 10, 2013 / Notices Act, 5. U.S.C. App. 10(a)(2) through implementing regulations at 41 CFR 102–3.150. The MHCC was established by the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.) as amended by the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106– 569). According to 42 U.S.C. 5403, as amended, the purposes of the MHCC are to: • Provide periodic recommendations to the Secretary to adopt, revise, and interpret the Federal manufactured housing construction and safety standards; • Provide periodic recommendations to the Secretary to adopt, revise, and interpret the procedural and enforcement regulations, including regulations specifying the permissible scope and conduct of monitoring; and • Be organized and carry out its business in a manner that guarantees a fair opportunity for the expression and consideration of various positions and for public participation. The MHCC is deemed an advisory committee not composed of Federal employees. Public Comment: Citizens wishing to make oral comments on the business of the MHCC Structural and Design Subcommittee are encouraged to register by or before April 17, 2013, by contacting the National Fire Protection Association, attention: Robert Solomon, by mail to: One Batterymarch Park, P.O. Box 9101, Quincy, Massachusetts 02169, or by fax to 617–984–7110, or by email to Imackay@nfpa.org. Written comments are encouraged. The MHCC Structural and Design Subcommittee strives to accommodate citizen comments to the extent possible within the time constraints of the meeting agenda. Advance registration is strongly encouraged. The MHCC will also provide an opportunity for public comment on specific matters before the Structural and Design Subcommittee. Tentative Agenda TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES April 23, 2013 from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST I. Welcome & Opening Remarks: Chair & DFO II. Review and Approve Subcommittee Meeting Minutes—Dated 10–23–12 to 10–25–12 III. Review Log of Proposal: Log #1 24 CFR 3285—Alternative Foundation System Testing. Log #80 24 CFR 3280.406— Formaldehyde Testing; Video explaining ASTM E1333: http:// www.ntainc.com/videofhydelarge.html; Video explaining VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:59 Apr 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 ASTM D6007: http:// www.ntainc.com/video-fhyde.html. Log #81 24 CFR 3280.403—Update reference standard for windows and sliding glass doors. Log #82 24 CFR 3280.404—Update reference standard for windows and sliding glass doors. Log #83 24 CFR 3280.405—Update reference standard for swinging exterior passage doors. IV. Adjourn: 4:00 p.m. Dated: April 4, 2013. Laura Marin, Acting General Deputy Assistant Secretary for Housing. [FR Doc. 2013–08265 Filed 4–9–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210–67–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R8–R–2012–N251; FXRS12650800000–112–FF08R0000] Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties, CA Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. AGENCY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of our final Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). In the CCP, we describe how we will manage the Refuge for the next 15 years. DATES: The CCP and FONSI are available now. The FONSI was signed on October 10, 2012. Implementation of the CCP may begin immediately. ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by any of the following methods. You may request a hard copy or CD–ROM. Agency Web site: Download a copy of the document(s) at http://www.fws.gov/ cno/refuges/DonEdwards/ DonEdwards.cfm. Email: sfbaynwrc@fws.gov. Include ‘‘DESFB CCP’’ in the subject line of the message. Fax: Attn: Winnie Chan, (510) 792– 5828. Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay NWR Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555. In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Copies of the Final CCP and FONSI may also be viewed at the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 21397 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555 (510) 792–0222. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Winnie Chan, Planning Team Leader, at (510) 792–0222 (See ADDRESSES), or Eric Mruz, Refuge Manager, at (510) 792– 0222. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1972 pursuant to the Act Authorizing the Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes (16 U.S.C. 667b), Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)). The roughly 30,000acre Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, located in the Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties of California, consists of several noncontiguous parcels divided into four management units that surround the southern edge of the San Francisco Bay. The Refuge was established to preserve and enhance wildlife habitat, protect migratory birds, and protect threatened and endangered species. The Refuge also provides opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation and environmental education. We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the final CCP for Don Edwards San Francisco Bay in accordance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1506.6(b)) requirements. We completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human environment, which we included in the environmental assessment (EA) that accompanied the draft CCP. 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, 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 wildlifedependent recreational opportunities available to the public, including opportunities for hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and environmental education and E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM 10APN1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 21398 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 10, 2013 / Notices interpretation. We intend to review and update the CCP at least every 15 years in accordance with the Administration Act. Our Draft CCP and EA were available for a 45-day public review and comment period, which we announced via several methods, including press releases, updates to constituents, and a Federal Register notice (77 FR 28895, May 16, 2012). The Draft CCP/EA identified and evaluated three alternatives for managing the Refuge for the next 15 years. Under Alternative A (no action alternative), the current management actions, including habitat management, wildlife management, wildlife-oriented recreation opportunities, and environmental education, would be continued. Current staffing and funding would remain the same. Existing restoration and management plans (e.g., Bair Island Restoration and Management Plan and South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project) would continue to be implemented. We would also actively work with partners and willing sellers to acquire the remaining lands within the approved acquisition boundary. Alternative B (preferred alternative) includes those actions in Alternative A. In addition, we would moderately expand biological, habitat management, visitor service, and environmental education activities. Refuge staff would expand the volunteer program to recruit new volunteers and provide additional learning opportunities to existing volunteers. Additional staff and funding would be needed to implement this alternative. Under Alternative C, in addition to tasks included in Alternative A and B, we would increase the frequency of baseline monitoring, investigate reintroduction of listed species (e.g., the salt marsh harvest mouse and the California clapper rail), survey for listed plant species, and encourage additional research to benefit listed species. Additional staff and funding would be needed to implement this alternative. We received eighteen letters on the Draft CCP and EA during the review and comment period. Comments focused upon the meaning of an ‘‘approved acquisition boundary’’ and the scope of our authority within the approved boundary, applicability of state health and safety codes in relation to mosquito management on the Refuge, and wildlife-public use conflicts. We incorporated comments we received into the CCP when appropriate, and we responded to the comments in an appendix to the CCP. In the FONSI, we selected Alternative B for VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:59 Apr 09, 2013 Jkt 229001 implementation. The FONSI documents our decision and is based on the information and analysis contained in the EA. Under the selected alternative, the Service will expand both natural resource management and visitor services opportunities on the Refuge. Additional biological activities would include baseline surveys on native flora and fauna, as well as a revised predator management program to include avian predators. Habitat would be improved along the marsh-upland ecotone to benefit tidal marsh species as well as for the western snowy plover and California least tern. Other habitat management activities would include development of a comprehensive weed management plan, addressing climate change impacts on Refuge resources, and efforts to acquire additional lands to meet Refuge purposes. A mosquito management plan would be implemented to improve coordination with local mosquito abatement districts to manage the threat of mosquito-borne disease on the Refuge. The mosquito management plan would be developed in accordance with Service policies. Visitor services will be expanded considerably through interpretation and environmental education opportunities. A wildlife photography permit system would be implemented to expand additional wildlife photography opportunities. Dog walking would be limited primarily to upland trails in order to further protect tidal marsh areas. A new LEED-certified visitor center complex would be constructed and additional interpretation activities would be provided. The environmental education program would be updated and expanded in several ways, such as through a LEED-certified remodel of the Environmental Education Center, Spanish translation of materials and curriculum, and adding programs at different sites. The volunteer program would be expanded through improving training for volunteers and developing permanent stewardship projects. The selected alternative best meets the Refuges’ purposes, vision, and goals; contributes to the Refuge System mission; addresses the significant issues and relevant mandates; and is consistent with principles of sound fish and wildlife management. Based on the associated environmental assessment, this alternative is not expected to result in significant environmental impacts PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and therefore does not require an environmental impact statement. Paul B. McKim, Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. 2013–08338 Filed 4–9–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Indian Gaming Commission Notice of Intent to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Approval of a Gaming Management Contract National Indian Gaming Commission, Interior. AGENCY: ACTION: Notice. This notice advises the public that the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) as lead agency, in cooperation with the Jamul Indian Village (Tribe), intends to gather information necessary to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for the proposed Gaming Management Contract between the Tribe and San Diego Gaming Ventures, LLC (SDGV). The Gaming Management Contract, if approved, would allow SDGV to manage the approved 203,000 square foot tribal gaming facility to be located on the Tribe’s Reservation, which qualifies as ‘‘Indian Lands’’ pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 2703. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Pacific Region, Division of Environmental, Cultural Resources Management & Safety will serve as environmental staff to the NIGC in the preparation of the SEIS. As such, the BIA is the contact for further information, in lieu of the NIGC. This notice also announces that no public scoping meeting will be held for the SEIS. SUMMARY: Written comments on the scope and implementation of this proposal must arrive by May 10, 2013. No public scoping meeting will be held for the proposal given the long history of the project and the extensive public input received to-date. DATES: You may mail, email, hand carry or fax written comments to: Mr. John Rydzik, Chief, Division of Environmental, Cultural Resources Management &Safety, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825; Facsimile (916) 978–6055; Email john.rydzik@bia.gov. ADDRESSES: E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM 10APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21397-21398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08338]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R8-R-2012-N251; FXRS12650800000-112-FF08R0000]


Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Alameda, 
Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties, CA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of our final Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and 
finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for the Don Edwards San 
Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). In the CCP, we 
describe how we will manage the Refuge for the next 15 years.

DATES: The CCP and FONSI are available now. The FONSI was signed on 
October 10, 2012. Implementation of the CCP may begin immediately.

ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by 
any of the following methods. You may request a hard copy or CD-ROM.
    Agency Web site: Download a copy of the document(s) at http://www.fws.gov/cno/refuges/DonEdwards/DonEdwards.cfm.
    Email: sfbaynwrc@fws.gov. Include ``DESFB CCP'' in the subject line 
of the message.
    Fax: Attn: Winnie Chan, (510) 792-5828.
    Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay NWR 
Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555.
    In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Copies of the Final CCP and FONSI may 
also be viewed at the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge 
Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555 (510) 792-0222.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Winnie Chan, Planning Team Leader, at 
(510) 792-0222 (See ADDRESSES), or Eric Mruz, Refuge Manager, at (510) 
792-0222.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge was 
established in 1972 pursuant to the Act Authorizing the Transfer of 
Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes (16 U.S.C. 667b), 
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Fish 
and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)). The roughly 30,000-
acre Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, located in 
the Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties of California, 
consists of several noncontiguous parcels divided into four management 
units that surround the southern edge of the San Francisco Bay. The 
Refuge was established to preserve and enhance wildlife habitat, 
protect migratory birds, and protect threatened and endangered species. 
The Refuge also provides opportunities for wildlife-dependent 
recreation and environmental education.
    We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the 
final CCP for Don Edwards San Francisco Bay in accordance with National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1506.6(b)) requirements. We 
completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human environment, 
which we included in the environmental assessment (EA) that accompanied 
the draft CCP.
    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, 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

[[Page 21398]]

interpretation. We intend to review and update the CCP at least every 
15 years in accordance with the Administration Act.
    Our Draft CCP and EA were available for a 45-day public review and 
comment period, which we announced via several methods, including press 
releases, updates to constituents, and a Federal Register notice (77 FR 
28895, May 16, 2012). The Draft CCP/EA identified and evaluated three 
alternatives for managing the Refuge for the next 15 years.
    Under Alternative A (no action alternative), the current management 
actions, including habitat management, wildlife management, wildlife-
oriented recreation opportunities, and environmental education, would 
be continued. Current staffing and funding would remain the same. 
Existing restoration and management plans (e.g., Bair Island 
Restoration and Management Plan and South Bay Salt Pond Restoration 
Project) would continue to be implemented. We would also actively work 
with partners and willing sellers to acquire the remaining lands within 
the approved acquisition boundary.
    Alternative B (preferred alternative) includes those actions in 
Alternative A. In addition, we would moderately expand biological, 
habitat management, visitor service, and environmental education 
activities. Refuge staff would expand the volunteer program to recruit 
new volunteers and provide additional learning opportunities to 
existing volunteers. Additional staff and funding would be needed to 
implement this alternative.
    Under Alternative C, in addition to tasks included in Alternative A 
and B, we would increase the frequency of baseline monitoring, 
investigate reintroduction of listed species (e.g., the salt marsh 
harvest mouse and the California clapper rail), survey for listed plant 
species, and encourage additional research to benefit listed species. 
Additional staff and funding would be needed to implement this 
alternative.
    We received eighteen letters on the Draft CCP and EA during the 
review and comment period. Comments focused upon the meaning of an 
``approved acquisition boundary'' and the scope of our authority within 
the approved boundary, applicability of state health and safety codes 
in relation to mosquito management on the Refuge, and wildlife-public 
use conflicts. We incorporated comments we received into the CCP when 
appropriate, and we responded to the comments in an appendix to the 
CCP. In the FONSI, we selected Alternative B for implementation. The 
FONSI documents our decision and is based on the information and 
analysis contained in the EA.
    Under the selected alternative, the Service will expand both 
natural resource management and visitor services opportunities on the 
Refuge. Additional biological activities would include baseline surveys 
on native flora and fauna, as well as a revised predator management 
program to include avian predators. Habitat would be improved along the 
marsh-upland ecotone to benefit tidal marsh species as well as for the 
western snowy plover and California least tern. Other habitat 
management activities would include development of a comprehensive weed 
management plan, addressing climate change impacts on Refuge resources, 
and efforts to acquire additional lands to meet Refuge purposes. A 
mosquito management plan would be implemented to improve coordination 
with local mosquito abatement districts to manage the threat of 
mosquito-borne disease on the Refuge. The mosquito management plan 
would be developed in accordance with Service policies.
    Visitor services will be expanded considerably through 
interpretation and environmental education opportunities. A wildlife 
photography permit system would be implemented to expand additional 
wildlife photography opportunities. Dog walking would be limited 
primarily to upland trails in order to further protect tidal marsh 
areas. A new LEED-certified visitor center complex would be constructed 
and additional interpretation activities would be provided. The 
environmental education program would be updated and expanded in 
several ways, such as through a LEED-certified remodel of the 
Environmental Education Center, Spanish translation of materials and 
curriculum, and adding programs at different sites. The volunteer 
program would be expanded through improving training for volunteers and 
developing permanent stewardship projects.
    The selected alternative best meets the Refuges' purposes, vision, 
and goals; contributes to the Refuge System mission; addresses the 
significant issues and relevant mandates; and is consistent with 
principles of sound fish and wildlife management. Based on the 
associated environmental assessment, this alternative is not expected 
to result in significant environmental impacts and therefore does not 
require an environmental impact statement.

Paul B. McKim,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento, 
California.
[FR Doc. 2013-08338 Filed 4-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P