Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meetings for the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Land Acquisition and Airspace Establishment To Support Large-Scale Marine Air Ground Task Force Live-Fire and Maneuver Training at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California, 67334-67337 [2016-23649]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
67334
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices
exercise due diligence and continue to
comply with provisions found in
Sections 745 and 746 of the Financial
Services and General Government
Appropriations Act, 2016 (Division E of
Pub. L. 114–113, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2016), as well as
similar provisions that future years’
appropriations acts may include. The
requirements of these provisions were
originally enacted in three Fiscal Year
(FY) 2012 appropriations acts that made
funds available to DoD Components for
obligation. The details of the provisions
in the three FY 2012 acts varied
somewhat but they generally required
DoD to consider suspension or
debarment before using appropriated
funding to enter into a grant or
cooperative agreement with a
corporation if the awarding official was
aware that the corporation had an
unpaid federal tax liability or was
convicted of a felony criminal violation
within the preceding 24 months. The FY
2012 provisions were in:
• Sections 8124 and 8125 of the
Department of Defense Appropriations
Act, 2012 (Division A of Pub. L. 112–74,
the Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2012);
• Section 514 of the Military
Construction and Veterans Affairs and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2012 (Division H of Pub. L. 112–74); and
• Sections 504 and 505 of the Energy
and Water Development Appropriations
Act, 2012 (Division B of Pub. L. 112–
74).
Generally, the requirements related to
these provisions of the FY 2012
appropriations acts have been included
in each subsequent fiscal year’s
appropriations acts. Since FY 2015, the
provisions related to felony convictions
and unpaid federal tax liabilities have
been enacted in the government-wide
general provisions portion of the
Financial Services and General
Government Appropriations Act.
Affected Public: Not-For-Profit
Institutions; Business or other for-profit.
Frequency: On occasion.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
Obtain or Retain Benefits.
OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet
Seehra.
Comments and recommendations on
the proposed information collection
should be emailed to Ms. Jasmeet
Seehra, DoD Desk Officer, at Oira_
submission@omb.eop.gov. Please
identify the proposed information
collection by DoD Desk Officer and the
Docket ID number and title of the
information collection.
You may also submit comments and
recommendations, identified by Docket
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
ID number and title, by the following
method:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name, Docket
ID number and title for this Federal
Register document. The general policy
for comments and other submissions
from members of the public is to make
these submissions available for public
viewing on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick
Licari.
Written requests for copies of the
information collection proposal should
be sent to Mr. Licari at WHS/ESD
Directives Division, 4800 Mark Center
Drive, East Tower, Suite 03F09,
Alexandria, VA 22350–3100.
Dated: September 27, 2016.
Aaron Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2016–23636 Filed 9–29–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Availability and Notice of
Public Meetings for the Draft
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement for Land Acquisition and
Airspace Establishment To Support
Large-Scale Marine Air Ground Task
Force Live-Fire and Maneuver Training
at the Marine Corps Air Ground
Combat Center, Twentynine Palms,
California
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Pursuant to section (102)(2)(c)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969, and regulations
implemented by the Council on
Environmental Quality (40 Code of
Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500–
1508), Department of Navy (DoN) NEPA
regulations (32 CFR part 775) and U.S.
Marine Corps (USMC) NEPA directives
(Marine Corps Order P5090.2A, changes
1–3), the DoN has prepared and filed
with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
evaluating the potential environmental
impacts that may result from
implementing alternative desert tortoise
translocation plans at the Marine Corps
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine
Palms (hereinafter ‘‘the Combat
Center’’). The Supplemental EIS is a
supplement to the Final EIS for ‘‘Land
Acquisition and Airspace Establishment
to Support Large-Scale Marine Air
Ground Task Force Live Fire and
Maneuver Training’’ dated July 2012
(hereinafter ‘‘2012 Final EIS’’) (77 FR
44234).
With the filing of the Draft
Supplemental EIS, the DoN is initiating
a 45-day public comment period and
has scheduled three public open house
meetings to receive oral and written
comments on the Draft Supplemental
EIS. Federal, state and local agencies
and interested parties are encouraged to
provide comments in person at any of
the public open house meetings, or in
writing anytime during the public
comment period. This notice announces
the dates and locations of the public
meetings and provides supplementary
information about the environmental
planning effort.
DATES: The Draft Supplemental EIS
public review period will begin
September 30, 2016, and end on
November 14, 2016. The USMC is
holding three informational open house
style public meetings to inform the
public about the proposed action and
the alternatives under consideration,
and to provide an opportunity for the
public to comment on the proposed
action, alternatives, and the adequacy
and accuracy of the Draft Supplemental
EIS. USMC representatives will be on
hand to discuss and answer questions
on the proposed action, the NEPA
process and the findings presented in
the Draft Supplemental EIS. Public open
house meetings will be held:
(1) Tuesday, October 25, 2016, 5:00
p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the Joshua Tree
Community Center, 6171 Sunburst
Avenue, Joshua Tree, CA 92252.
(2) Wednesday, October 26, 2016, 5:00
p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the Palm Springs
Convention Center, 277 N. Avenida
Caballeros, Palm Springs, CA 92262.
(3) Thursday, October 27, 2016, 5:00
p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the Barstow Harvey
House, 681 N. 1st Avenue, Barstow, CA
92311.
Attendees will be able to submit
written comments at the public
meetings. A stenographer will be
present to transcribe oral comments.
Equal weight will be given to oral and
written statements. All statements, oral
transcription and written, submitted
during the public review period will
become part of the public record on the
Draft Supplemental EIS and will be
responded to in the Final Supplemental
EIS. Comments may also be submitted
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
by U.S. mail or electronically via the
project Web site provided below.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Draft
Supplemental EIS is available at the
project Web site, https://
www.SEISforLAA.com, and at the local
libraries identified at the end of this
notice. Comments on the Draft
Supplemental EIS can be submitted via
the project Web site or submitted in
writing to: 29Palms SEIS Project Team,
c/o Cardno Government Services, 3888
State Street, Ste. 201, Santa Barbara, CA
93105. All comments must be
postmarked or received by November
14, 2016, to ensure they become part of
the official record. All timely comments
will be responded to in the Final
Supplemental EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Resource Management Group at the
Combat Center 760–830–3737.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice
of Intent to prepare the Supplemental
EIS was published in the Federal
Register on August 24, 2016 (Vol. 81,
No. 164, p. 57891–57893).
Proposed Action
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1502.9(c), the
Draft Supplemental EIS evaluates new
information relevant to environmental
concerns associated with translocation
of tortoises from specific training areas
on newly acquired lands. Translocation
was deemed necessary to mitigate the
moderate to high levels of impact on the
tortoise population from the Marine
Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) training
activities assessed in the 2012 Final EIS.
A 2012 Biological Opinion (hereinafter
‘‘the 2012 BO’’) issued by the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) approved several conservation
measures pertaining to the desert
tortoise, including a 2011 General
Translocation Plan (GTP). Since the
2012 Final EIS, and the subsequent
Record of Decision (ROD) signed by the
DON in February 2013 (hereinafter ‘‘the
2013 ROD’’), the Marine Corps has
conducted additional detailed studies
and worked cooperatively with the
USFWS, the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on
alternative translocation plans for the
desert tortoise, as required in the 2012
BO.
The proposed action for this
Supplemental EIS includes four
fundamental and interrelated
components that are reflected in all
alternatives:
(1) Recipient and Control Areas. The
2011 GTP identified criteria for
selection of recipient areas that should
be met for successful translocation to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
occur. These criteria are consistent with
the goals, objectives, and recovery
strategies of the 2011 USFWS revised
recovery plan for the Mojave population
of the desert tortoise and the 2010
USFWS plan development guidance for
translocation of desert tortoises.
(2) Translocation Methods.
Translocation methods would include
handling procedures, fencing,
translocation, and clearance surveys. All
tortoise handling would be
accomplished by the techniques
outlined in the Desert Tortoise Field
Manual, including the most recent
disease prevention techniques. Juvenile
tortoises that are too small to wear
transmitters would be moved to
established juvenile pens at Tortoise
Research and Captive Rearing Sites
(TRACRS) or Special Use Areas where
they may become part of the head start
program (the Combat Center’s tortoise
rearing program). Tortoise exclusion
fencing would be installed along certain
borders of newly designated Special Use
Areas (areas that have not been
identified as part of the large-scale
training scenarios and that contain
habitat supporting desert tortoises) on
Combat Center land near maneuver or
high use areas.
Desert tortoises that exhibit moderate
to severe nasal discharge would not be
translocated, and may be sent to a
USFWS-approved facility where they
would undergo further assessment,
treatment, and/or study. For up to the
first 5 years following initial
translocation, clearance surveys would
be conducted in the high- and moderateimpact areas to locate and remove any
remaining desert tortoises.
(3) Post-Translocation Monitoring.
Radio-telemetry tracking of all
translocated tortoises is impractical;
however, 20 percent of translocated
tortoises, and a similar number of
resident and control tortoises, would be
tracked using radio-telemetry. Repeated
readings of mark-recapture plots where
tortoises have been translocated would
be conducted to yield information on
survival of translocated tortoises,
population demography, repatriation,
and health. Mark-recapture plots would
be used to estimate the tortoise
population size by capturing, marking,
and releasing a portion of the
population, then later capturing another
portion and counting the number of
marked individuals. Capture, marking,
and releasing activities would not
involve any ground disturbance. Four
subject areas would be investigated by
monitoring, each of which is described
below:
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67335
(a) Survival: Survival of translocated is the
main metric for evaluating translocation as a
take minimization measure. Survival of
translocated tortoises would be measured
using two methods: Mark-recapture plots and
tracking.
(b) Threats to survival: Anthropogenic
disturbances and predator populations that
cause potential risks to recovery and
translocation success threats would be
assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively
and compared to current levels.
(c) Habitat stability/changes: Habitat
would be assessed to monitor changes or
stability during each reading of the markrecapture plots.
(d) Health and disease: The incidence of
disease and other health issues would be
monitored using body condition indices,
clinical signs of disease, serology, and visual
inspection for injuries. This would be
accomplished using both telemetered
tortoises and all tortoises captured on markrecapture plots. Any health problems
observed (e.g., rapid declines in body
condition, perceived outbreaks of disease,
mortality events) would be reported to the
USFWS, CDFW, and BLM such that
appropriate actions could be taken in a
timely manner.
(4) Other Research. The Marine Corps,
in consultation with USFWS, identified
a research program to benefit recovery
of the species. Research topics include
translocation effectiveness, constrained
dispersal (‘‘repatriation’’ in the 2011
GTP), stocking densities, habitat, and
disease.
Two main research topics that would
be implemented are summarized below,
both of which are anticipated to provide
results that are topical and important for
recovery.
(a) Experimental Translocation
Densities: The intent behind this
research is to evaluate the capability of
the habitat to sustain a certain density
of tortoises.
(b) Constrained Dispersal:
Constrained dispersal (called
‘‘repatriation’’ in the 2011 GTP) is a
technique wherein tortoises are
translocated to a fenced site to
encourage settling before the fence is
removed.
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed action
evaluated in the Supplemental EIS is to
study alternative translocation plans in
support of the project that was
described in the 2012 Final EIS, selected
in the 2013 Record of Decision (ROD)(78
FR 11632), and authorized by the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2014. The 2011 GTP,
developed during the section 7
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
consultation on the 2012 Final EIS
proposed action, identified proposed
recipient areas, translocation methods,
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
67336
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
and research treatments based on
information available at the time of
publication. Studies were planned over
the following 3 years to provide
information necessary to refine these
areas, methods, and treatments. The
2011 GTP explicitly recognized that as
a result of these studies, the Combat
Center could refine these areas to
specific sites and determine better
recipient sites not considered in the
2011 GTP. The results of these efforts
and further consultation with USFWS
and CDFW, identified refinements to
translocation methods, recipient sites,
and research treatments that could
better support the goals of the
translocation effort (and became the
basis for the action alternatives
considered in this Supplemental EIS).
The alternative selected in the ROD for
the Supplemental EIS will be
implemented prior to conducting
sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and
maneuver field training for MEB-sized
Marine Air Ground Task Forces
(MAGTFs) contemplated in the 2012
Final EIS.
The Marine Corps needs to implement
the proposed action to satisfy
requirements identified in the 2012
Final EIS and associated 2012 BO. The
2012 BO concluded that the
implementation of the Preferred
Alternative from the 2012 Final EIS
would likely result in the ‘‘take’’ of
desert tortoises associated with military
training, tortoise translocation efforts,
and authorized and unauthorized OffHighway Vehicle (OHV) use by
recreationists displaced from former
areas of the Johnson Valley OHV Area.
Alternatives Considered in the Draft
Supplemental EIS
In light of the purpose and need for
the proposed action, the DON has
identified two potential action
alternatives and a No-Action Alternative
for the translocation of desert tortoise
from training impact areas.
Each alternative includes recipient
areas/sites (to which tortoises would be
translocated) and control areas/sites
(where the resident tortoise populations
will be studied to provide comparative
data on survival, threats to survival,
habitat stability and changes, and health
and disease relative to the translocated
tortoise populations at the recipient
sites). Each alternative also specifies the
details of the proposed tortoise
translocation, including specific
handling procedures, fencing, clearance
surveys, 30 years of post-translocation
monitoring, and other research
activities.
The Combat Center identified and
applied screening criteria from the 2011
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
USFWS revised recovery plan for the
Mojave population of the desert tortoise
and the 2011 USFWS revised recovery
plan development guidance for
translocation of desert tortoises to
evaluate and select the proposed
recipient areas/sites under each
alternative. These criteria relate to land
use, habitat quality, population levels,
disease prevalence, and distance from
collection. The Combat Center also
screened for research and monitoring
feasibility.
Under the No-Action Alternative, the
Marine Corps would conduct
translocation of desert tortoises in
accordance with the 2011 GTP
described in the 2012 BO. Alternatives
1 and 2 primarily differ from the NoAction Alternative in the selection of
proposed recipient and control areas
and in the distribution of desert
tortoises at each release site. Compared
to the No-Action Alternative,
Alternatives 1 and 2 would also include
additional research studies and reflect
updated information obtained from the
3-year program of surveys conducted
since the 2012 Final EIS. Alternative 2
differs from Alternative 1 in that: (1)
One less recipient site would be used;
(2) the pairing of control sites to
recipient sites would be different; (3)
the Bullion control site would be
located on the Combat Center instead of
within the Cleghorn Lakes Wilderness
Area; and (4) translocation densities
would be different.
Environmental Effects Identified in the
Draft Supplemental EIS
Potential impacts were evaluated in
the Draft Supplemental EIS under all
alternatives for the following resources:
Biological resources, land use, air
quality, and cultural resources. The
Draft Supplemental EIS analysis
evaluates direct, indirect, short-term
and long-term impacts, as well as
cumulative impacts from other relevant
activities.
The Draft Supplemental EIS includes
mitigation measures, special
conservation measures, and features of
project design to avoid or minimize
potential impacts. The proposed action
would fully comply with regulatory
requirements for the protection of
environmental resources. A desert
tortoise translocation plan has been
submitted to the USFWS in compliance
with Section 7 of the ESA. The USFWS
will issue a revised BO that will be
included with the Final Supplemental
EIS. In addition, the USMC is
coordinating with the California State
Historic Preservation Office and affected
Native American tribes under Section
106 of the National Historic
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Preservation Act, and with the Mojave
Desert Air Quality Management District
under the Clean Air Act.
The proposed action would result in
unavoidable impacts related to
biological resources (due to desert
tortoise translocation as well as impacts
to vegetation and desert tortoise habitat
resulting from construction of fences
and associated maintenance roads); land
use (due to desert tortoise
translocation); air quality (due to air
emissions from construction activities);
and potentially cultural resources (due
to the fence and road construction;
although the fences/roads would be
routed to avoid cultural resource sites).
Schedule: The Notice of Availability
(NOA) and Notice of Public Meetings
(NOPM) publication in the Federal
Register and local print media starts the
45-day public comment period for the
Draft Supplemental EIS. The DoN will
consider and respond to all written, oral
and electronic comments, submitted as
described above, in the Final
Supplemental EIS. The DoN intends to
issue the Final Supplemental EIS in
January 2017, at which time an NOA
will be published in the Federal
Register and local print media. A
Record of Decision is expected to be
published in February 2017.
Copies of the Draft Supplemental EIS
can be found on the project Web site,
https://www.SEISforLAA.com or at the
following locations:
(1) Newton T. Bass Apple Valley Branch
Library, 14901 Dale Evans Parkway,
Apple Valley, CA 92307
(2) Barstow Branch Library, 304 E.
Buena Vista St., Barstow, CA 92311
(3) Joshua Tree Library, 6465 Park Blvd.,
Joshua Tree, CA 92252
(4) Lucerne Valley Janice Horst Branch
Library, 33103 Old Woman Springs
Road, Lucerne Valley, CA 92356
(5) Needles Branch Library, 1111 Bailey
Ave., Needles, CA 92363
(6) Ovitt Family Community Library,
215 E. C St., Ontario, CA 91764
(7) Stanley Mosk Library and Courts
Building, 914 Capitol Mall,
Sacramento, CA 95814
(8) San Bernardino County Library
Administrative Offices, 777 E.
Rialto Avenue, San Bernardino, CA
92415
(9) Twentynine Palms Library, 6078
Adobe Road, Twentynine Palms,
CA 92277
(10) Victorville City Library, 15011
Circle Drive, Victorville, CA 92395
(11) Yucca Valley Branch Library, 57098
29 Palms Highway, Yucca Valley,
CA 92284
(12) Palm Springs Public Library, 300 S.
Sunrise Way, Palm Springs, CA
92262
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 190 / Friday, September 30, 2016 / Notices
Dated: September 26, 2016.
C. Mora,
Commander, Judge Advocate General’s Corps,
U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–23649 Filed 9–29–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket No.: ED–2016–ICCD–0106]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Comment Request;
Targeted Teacher Shortage Areas
Office of Postsecondary
Education (OPE), Department of
Education (ED).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. chapter 3501 et seq.), ED is
proposing a revision of an existing
information collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before
November 29, 2016.
ADDRESSES: To access and review all the
documents related to the information
collection listed in this notice, please
use https://www.regulations.gov by
searching the Docket ID number ED–
2016–ICCD–0106. Comments submitted
in response to this notice should be
submitted electronically through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov by selecting the
Docket ID number or via postal mail,
commercial delivery, or hand delivery.
Please note that comments submitted by
fax or email and those submitted after
the comment period will not be
accepted. Written requests for
information or comments submitted by
postal mail or delivery should be
addressed to the Director of the
Information Collection Clearance
Division, U.S. Department of Education,
400 Maryland Avenue SW., LBJ, Room
2E–347, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
specific questions related to collection
activities, please contact Freddie Cross,
202–453–7224.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of Education (ED), in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general
public and Federal agencies with an
opportunity to comment on proposed,
revised, and continuing collections of
information. This helps the Department
assess the impact of its information
collection requirements and minimize
the public’s reporting burden. It also
helps the public understand the
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:49 Sep 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
Department’s information collection
requirements and provide the requested
data in the desired format. ED is
soliciting comments on the proposed
information collection request (ICR) that
is described below. The Department of
Education is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
Title of Collection: Targeted Teacher
Shortage Areas.
OMB Control Number: 1840–0595.
Type of Review: A revision of an
existing information collection.
Respondents/Affected Public: State,
Local, and Tribal Governments.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 57.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 4,275.
Abstract: This request is for approval
of reporting requirements that are
contained in the Federal Family
Education Loan Program regulations
which address the targeted teacher
deferment provision of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended. The
information collected is necessary for a
state to support it’s annual request for
designation of teacher shortage areas
within the state. In previous years, the
data collection was conducted by paper
and pencil, mail-in method. Beginning
with the 2017 collection, data collection
will be conducted completely online
thus reducing burden to the
respondents.
Dated: September 27, 2016.
Kate Mullan,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Office of the Chief Privacy
Officer, Office of Management.
[FR Doc. 2016–23658 Filed 9–29–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[OE Docket No. EA–429]
Application To Export Electric Energy;
CWP Energy
Office of Electricity Delivery
and Energy Reliability, DOE.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ACTION:
67337
Notice of application.
CWP Energy (Applicant or
CWP Energy) has applied for authority
to transmit electric energy from the
United States to Mexico pursuant to
section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act.
DATES: Comments, protests, or motions
to intervene must be submitted on or
before October 31, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Comments, protests,
motions to intervene, or requests for
more information should be addressed
to: Office of Electricity Delivery and
Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE–20,
U.S. Department of Energy, 1000
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20585–0350. Because
of delays in handling conventional mail,
it is recommended that documents be
transmitted by overnight mail, by
electronic mail to Electricity.Exports@
hq.doe.gov, or by facsimile to 202–586–
8008.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of
electricity from the United States to a
foreign country are regulated by the
Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to
sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the
Department of Energy Organization Act
(42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require
authorization under section 202(e) of
the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.
824a(e)).
On September 14, 2016, DOE received
an application from CWP Energy for
authority to transmit electric energy
from the United States to Mexico as a
power marketer for a five-year term
using existing international
transmission facilities.
In its application, CWP Energy states
that it does not own or control any
electric generation or transmission
facilities, and it does not have a
franchised service area. The electric
energy that CWP Energy proposes to
export to Mexico would be surplus
energy purchased from third parties
such as electric utilities and Federal
power marketing agencies pursuant to
voluntary agreements. The existing
international transmission facilities to
be utilized by the Applicant have
previously been authorized by
Presidential Permits issued pursuant to
Executive Order 10485, as amended,
and are appropriate for open access
transmission by third parties.
Procedural Matters: Any person
desiring to be heard in this proceeding
should file a comment or protest to the
application at the address provided
above. Protests should be filed in
accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC)
Rules of Practice and Procedures (18
CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67334-67337]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23649]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Meetings for the
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for Land Acquisition
and Airspace Establishment To Support Large-Scale Marine Air Ground
Task Force Live-Fire and Maneuver Training at the Marine Corps Air
Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California
AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section (102)(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, and regulations implemented by the Council
on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts
1500-1508), Department of Navy (DoN) NEPA regulations (32 CFR part 775)
and U.S. Marine Corps (USMC) NEPA directives (Marine Corps Order
P5090.2A, changes 1-3), the DoN has prepared and filed with the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluating the potential
environmental impacts that may result from implementing alternative
desert tortoise translocation plans at the Marine Corps Air Ground
Combat Center, Twentynine Palms (hereinafter ``the Combat Center'').
The Supplemental EIS is a supplement to the Final EIS for ``Land
Acquisition and Airspace Establishment to Support Large-Scale Marine
Air Ground Task Force Live Fire and Maneuver Training'' dated July 2012
(hereinafter ``2012 Final EIS'') (77 FR 44234).
With the filing of the Draft Supplemental EIS, the DoN is
initiating a 45-day public comment period and has scheduled three
public open house meetings to receive oral and written comments on the
Draft Supplemental EIS. Federal, state and local agencies and
interested parties are encouraged to provide comments in person at any
of the public open house meetings, or in writing anytime during the
public comment period. This notice announces the dates and locations of
the public meetings and provides supplementary information about the
environmental planning effort.
DATES: The Draft Supplemental EIS public review period will begin
September 30, 2016, and end on November 14, 2016. The USMC is holding
three informational open house style public meetings to inform the
public about the proposed action and the alternatives under
consideration, and to provide an opportunity for the public to comment
on the proposed action, alternatives, and the adequacy and accuracy of
the Draft Supplemental EIS. USMC representatives will be on hand to
discuss and answer questions on the proposed action, the NEPA process
and the findings presented in the Draft Supplemental EIS. Public open
house meetings will be held:
(1) Tuesday, October 25, 2016, 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the
Joshua Tree Community Center, 6171 Sunburst Avenue, Joshua Tree, CA
92252.
(2) Wednesday, October 26, 2016, 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the
Palm Springs Convention Center, 277 N. Avenida Caballeros, Palm
Springs, CA 92262.
(3) Thursday, October 27, 2016, 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., at the
Barstow Harvey House, 681 N. 1st Avenue, Barstow, CA 92311.
Attendees will be able to submit written comments at the public
meetings. A stenographer will be present to transcribe oral comments.
Equal weight will be given to oral and written statements. All
statements, oral transcription and written, submitted during the public
review period will become part of the public record on the Draft
Supplemental EIS and will be responded to in the Final Supplemental
EIS. Comments may also be submitted
[[Page 67335]]
by U.S. mail or electronically via the project Web site provided below.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the Draft Supplemental EIS is available at the
project Web site, https://www.SEISforLAA.com, and at the local libraries
identified at the end of this notice. Comments on the Draft
Supplemental EIS can be submitted via the project Web site or submitted
in writing to: 29Palms SEIS Project Team, c/o Cardno Government
Services, 3888 State Street, Ste. 201, Santa Barbara, CA 93105. All
comments must be postmarked or received by November 14, 2016, to ensure
they become part of the official record. All timely comments will be
responded to in the Final Supplemental EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Resource Management Group at the
Combat Center 760-830-3737.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Notice of Intent to prepare the
Supplemental EIS was published in the Federal Register on August 24,
2016 (Vol. 81, No. 164, p. 57891-57893).
Proposed Action
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1502.9(c), the Draft Supplemental EIS evaluates
new information relevant to environmental concerns associated with
translocation of tortoises from specific training areas on newly
acquired lands. Translocation was deemed necessary to mitigate the
moderate to high levels of impact on the tortoise population from the
Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) training activities assessed in the
2012 Final EIS. A 2012 Biological Opinion (hereinafter ``the 2012 BO'')
issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) approved
several conservation measures pertaining to the desert tortoise,
including a 2011 General Translocation Plan (GTP). Since the 2012 Final
EIS, and the subsequent Record of Decision (ROD) signed by the DON in
February 2013 (hereinafter ``the 2013 ROD''), the Marine Corps has
conducted additional detailed studies and worked cooperatively with the
USFWS, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on alternative translocation plans for
the desert tortoise, as required in the 2012 BO.
The proposed action for this Supplemental EIS includes four
fundamental and interrelated components that are reflected in all
alternatives:
(1) Recipient and Control Areas. The 2011 GTP identified criteria
for selection of recipient areas that should be met for successful
translocation to occur. These criteria are consistent with the goals,
objectives, and recovery strategies of the 2011 USFWS revised recovery
plan for the Mojave population of the desert tortoise and the 2010
USFWS plan development guidance for translocation of desert tortoises.
(2) Translocation Methods. Translocation methods would include
handling procedures, fencing, translocation, and clearance surveys. All
tortoise handling would be accomplished by the techniques outlined in
the Desert Tortoise Field Manual, including the most recent disease
prevention techniques. Juvenile tortoises that are too small to wear
transmitters would be moved to established juvenile pens at Tortoise
Research and Captive Rearing Sites (TRACRS) or Special Use Areas where
they may become part of the head start program (the Combat Center's
tortoise rearing program). Tortoise exclusion fencing would be
installed along certain borders of newly designated Special Use Areas
(areas that have not been identified as part of the large-scale
training scenarios and that contain habitat supporting desert
tortoises) on Combat Center land near maneuver or high use areas.
Desert tortoises that exhibit moderate to severe nasal discharge
would not be translocated, and may be sent to a USFWS-approved facility
where they would undergo further assessment, treatment, and/or study.
For up to the first 5 years following initial translocation, clearance
surveys would be conducted in the high- and moderate-impact areas to
locate and remove any remaining desert tortoises.
(3) Post-Translocation Monitoring. Radio-telemetry tracking of all
translocated tortoises is impractical; however, 20 percent of
translocated tortoises, and a similar number of resident and control
tortoises, would be tracked using radio-telemetry. Repeated readings of
mark-recapture plots where tortoises have been translocated would be
conducted to yield information on survival of translocated tortoises,
population demography, repatriation, and health. Mark-recapture plots
would be used to estimate the tortoise population size by capturing,
marking, and releasing a portion of the population, then later
capturing another portion and counting the number of marked
individuals. Capture, marking, and releasing activities would not
involve any ground disturbance. Four subject areas would be
investigated by monitoring, each of which is described below:
(a) Survival: Survival of translocated is the main metric for
evaluating translocation as a take minimization measure. Survival of
translocated tortoises would be measured using two methods: Mark-
recapture plots and tracking.
(b) Threats to survival: Anthropogenic disturbances and predator
populations that cause potential risks to recovery and translocation
success threats would be assessed both qualitatively and
quantitatively and compared to current levels.
(c) Habitat stability/changes: Habitat would be assessed to
monitor changes or stability during each reading of the mark-
recapture plots.
(d) Health and disease: The incidence of disease and other
health issues would be monitored using body condition indices,
clinical signs of disease, serology, and visual inspection for
injuries. This would be accomplished using both telemetered
tortoises and all tortoises captured on mark-recapture plots. Any
health problems observed (e.g., rapid declines in body condition,
perceived outbreaks of disease, mortality events) would be reported
to the USFWS, CDFW, and BLM such that appropriate actions could be
taken in a timely manner.
(4) Other Research. The Marine Corps, in consultation with USFWS,
identified a research program to benefit recovery of the species.
Research topics include translocation effectiveness, constrained
dispersal (``repatriation'' in the 2011 GTP), stocking densities,
habitat, and disease.
Two main research topics that would be implemented are summarized
below, both of which are anticipated to provide results that are
topical and important for recovery.
(a) Experimental Translocation Densities: The intent behind this
research is to evaluate the capability of the habitat to sustain a
certain density of tortoises.
(b) Constrained Dispersal: Constrained dispersal (called
``repatriation'' in the 2011 GTP) is a technique wherein tortoises are
translocated to a fenced site to encourage settling before the fence is
removed.
Purpose and Need
The purpose of the proposed action evaluated in the Supplemental
EIS is to study alternative translocation plans in support of the
project that was described in the 2012 Final EIS, selected in the 2013
Record of Decision (ROD)(78 FR 11632), and authorized by the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014. The 2011 GTP, developed
during the section 7 Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation on the
2012 Final EIS proposed action, identified proposed recipient areas,
translocation methods,
[[Page 67336]]
and research treatments based on information available at the time of
publication. Studies were planned over the following 3 years to provide
information necessary to refine these areas, methods, and treatments.
The 2011 GTP explicitly recognized that as a result of these studies,
the Combat Center could refine these areas to specific sites and
determine better recipient sites not considered in the 2011 GTP. The
results of these efforts and further consultation with USFWS and CDFW,
identified refinements to translocation methods, recipient sites, and
research treatments that could better support the goals of the
translocation effort (and became the basis for the action alternatives
considered in this Supplemental EIS). The alternative selected in the
ROD for the Supplemental EIS will be implemented prior to conducting
sustained, combined-arms, live-fire, and maneuver field training for
MEB-sized Marine Air Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs) contemplated in the
2012 Final EIS.
The Marine Corps needs to implement the proposed action to satisfy
requirements identified in the 2012 Final EIS and associated 2012 BO.
The 2012 BO concluded that the implementation of the Preferred
Alternative from the 2012 Final EIS would likely result in the ``take''
of desert tortoises associated with military training, tortoise
translocation efforts, and authorized and unauthorized Off-Highway
Vehicle (OHV) use by recreationists displaced from former areas of the
Johnson Valley OHV Area.
Alternatives Considered in the Draft Supplemental EIS
In light of the purpose and need for the proposed action, the DON
has identified two potential action alternatives and a No-Action
Alternative for the translocation of desert tortoise from training
impact areas.
Each alternative includes recipient areas/sites (to which tortoises
would be translocated) and control areas/sites (where the resident
tortoise populations will be studied to provide comparative data on
survival, threats to survival, habitat stability and changes, and
health and disease relative to the translocated tortoise populations at
the recipient sites). Each alternative also specifies the details of
the proposed tortoise translocation, including specific handling
procedures, fencing, clearance surveys, 30 years of post-translocation
monitoring, and other research activities.
The Combat Center identified and applied screening criteria from
the 2011 USFWS revised recovery plan for the Mojave population of the
desert tortoise and the 2011 USFWS revised recovery plan development
guidance for translocation of desert tortoises to evaluate and select
the proposed recipient areas/sites under each alternative. These
criteria relate to land use, habitat quality, population levels,
disease prevalence, and distance from collection. The Combat Center
also screened for research and monitoring feasibility.
Under the No-Action Alternative, the Marine Corps would conduct
translocation of desert tortoises in accordance with the 2011 GTP
described in the 2012 BO. Alternatives 1 and 2 primarily differ from
the No-Action Alternative in the selection of proposed recipient and
control areas and in the distribution of desert tortoises at each
release site. Compared to the No-Action Alternative, Alternatives 1 and
2 would also include additional research studies and reflect updated
information obtained from the 3-year program of surveys conducted since
the 2012 Final EIS. Alternative 2 differs from Alternative 1 in that:
(1) One less recipient site would be used; (2) the pairing of control
sites to recipient sites would be different; (3) the Bullion control
site would be located on the Combat Center instead of within the
Cleghorn Lakes Wilderness Area; and (4) translocation densities would
be different.
Environmental Effects Identified in the Draft Supplemental EIS
Potential impacts were evaluated in the Draft Supplemental EIS
under all alternatives for the following resources: Biological
resources, land use, air quality, and cultural resources. The Draft
Supplemental EIS analysis evaluates direct, indirect, short-term and
long-term impacts, as well as cumulative impacts from other relevant
activities.
The Draft Supplemental EIS includes mitigation measures, special
conservation measures, and features of project design to avoid or
minimize potential impacts. The proposed action would fully comply with
regulatory requirements for the protection of environmental resources.
A desert tortoise translocation plan has been submitted to the USFWS in
compliance with Section 7 of the ESA. The USFWS will issue a revised BO
that will be included with the Final Supplemental EIS. In addition, the
USMC is coordinating with the California State Historic Preservation
Office and affected Native American tribes under Section 106 of the
National Historic Preservation Act, and with the Mojave Desert Air
Quality Management District under the Clean Air Act.
The proposed action would result in unavoidable impacts related to
biological resources (due to desert tortoise translocation as well as
impacts to vegetation and desert tortoise habitat resulting from
construction of fences and associated maintenance roads); land use (due
to desert tortoise translocation); air quality (due to air emissions
from construction activities); and potentially cultural resources (due
to the fence and road construction; although the fences/roads would be
routed to avoid cultural resource sites).
Schedule: The Notice of Availability (NOA) and Notice of Public
Meetings (NOPM) publication in the Federal Register and local print
media starts the 45-day public comment period for the Draft
Supplemental EIS. The DoN will consider and respond to all written,
oral and electronic comments, submitted as described above, in the
Final Supplemental EIS. The DoN intends to issue the Final Supplemental
EIS in January 2017, at which time an NOA will be published in the
Federal Register and local print media. A Record of Decision is
expected to be published in February 2017.
Copies of the Draft Supplemental EIS can be found on the project
Web site, https://www.SEISforLAA.com or at the following locations:
(1) Newton T. Bass Apple Valley Branch Library, 14901 Dale Evans
Parkway, Apple Valley, CA 92307
(2) Barstow Branch Library, 304 E. Buena Vista St., Barstow, CA 92311
(3) Joshua Tree Library, 6465 Park Blvd., Joshua Tree, CA 92252
(4) Lucerne Valley Janice Horst Branch Library, 33103 Old Woman Springs
Road, Lucerne Valley, CA 92356
(5) Needles Branch Library, 1111 Bailey Ave., Needles, CA 92363
(6) Ovitt Family Community Library, 215 E. C St., Ontario, CA 91764
(7) Stanley Mosk Library and Courts Building, 914 Capitol Mall,
Sacramento, CA 95814
(8) San Bernardino County Library Administrative Offices, 777 E. Rialto
Avenue, San Bernardino, CA 92415
(9) Twentynine Palms Library, 6078 Adobe Road, Twentynine Palms, CA
92277
(10) Victorville City Library, 15011 Circle Drive, Victorville, CA
92395
(11) Yucca Valley Branch Library, 57098 29 Palms Highway, Yucca Valley,
CA 92284
(12) Palm Springs Public Library, 300 S. Sunrise Way, Palm Springs, CA
92262
[[Page 67337]]
Dated: September 26, 2016.
C. Mora,
Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register
Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-23649 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
