Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Incidental Take Permit Application; Proposed Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Associated Documents; Brea, California, 56990-56992 [2017-25889]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
56990
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Notices
Next Steps
We will evaluate the ITP application,
associated documents, and public
comments in reaching a final decision
on whether the application meets the
requirements of section 10(a) of the ESA
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The HCP and
EA may change in response to public
comments. After completion of the EA,
we will determine whether the
proposed action warrants a finding of no
significant impact or whether an
environmental impact statement should
be prepared. We will also evaluate
whether the proposed ITP action would
comply with the requirements of section
7 of the ESA by conducting a formal
consultation on the proposed ITP
action. 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 an
ITP. If the requirements are met, we will
issue the ITP to the applicant. We will
not make our final decision until after
the end of the 45-day public comment
period, and we will fully consider all
comments and information we receive
during the public comment period.
Authority
We provide this notice in accordance
with the requirements of section 10(c) of
the ESA and its implementing
regulations (50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32)
and NEPA and its implementing
regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
Dated: September 14, 2017.
Theresa E. Rabot,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon.
[FR Doc. 2017–25875 Filed 11–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R8–ES–2017–N107;
FXES11140800000–178–FF08ECAR00]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Incidental Take Permit
Application; Proposed Low-Effect
Habitat Conservation Plan for the
Coastal California Gnatcatcher and
Associated Documents; Brea,
California
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, have received an
application from Orange County Waste
& Recycling for a 5-year incidental take
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
permit for the threatened coastal
California gnatcatcher pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act. We are
requesting comments on the permit
application and on our preliminary
determination that the applicant’s
accompanying proposed habitat
conservation plan qualifies as low
effect, eligible for a categorical
exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act. The basis for
this determination is discussed in our
environmental action statement and
associated low-effect screening form,
which are also available for public
review.
DATES: Written comments should be
received on or before January 2, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submitting Comments: You
may submit comments by one of the
following methods:
• U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, Fish
and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2177 Salk Avenue, Suite
250, Carlsbad, CA 92008.
• Fax: Field Supervisor, 760–431–
9624.
• Email: fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov;
please include ‘‘Olinda Alpha Landfill
HCP’’ in the subject line.
Obtaining Documents: You may
obtain copies of the proposed HCP and
EAS on the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife’s
HCP Web site at https://www.fws.gov/
carlsbad/HCPs/HCP_Docs.html. To
request copies of the application,
proposed HCP, and EAS, contact the
Service immediately, by telephone at
760–431–9440 or by letter to the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES). Copies of the proposed
HCP and EAS also are available for
public inspection during regular
business hours at the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Karen Goebel, Assistant Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES); telephone: 760–
431–9440. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal Relay
Service (FRS) at 800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
have received an application from
Orange County Waste & Recycling
(applicant) for a 5-year incidental take
permit for one covered species pursuant
to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA). The
application addresses the potential
‘‘take’’ of the threatened coastal
California gnatcatcher (Polioptila
californica californica; gnatcatcher) in
the course of activities associated with
the construction, operation, and
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
maintenance of the Olinda Alpha
Landfill projects, in the City of Brea,
Orange County, California. A
conservation program to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate for project
activities would be implemented as
described in the applicant’s proposed
habitat conservation plan (HCP).
We are requesting comments on the
permit application and on our
preliminary determination that the
proposed HCP qualifies as a low-effect
HCP, eligible for a categorical exclusion
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; NEPA). The basis for
this determination is discussed in our
environmental action statement (EAS)
and associated low-effect screening
form, which are also available for public
review.
Background
Section 9 of the ESA and its
implementing Federal regulations
prohibit the take of animal species listed
as endangered or threatened. ‘‘Take’’ is
defined under the ESA as to ‘‘harass,
harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, or collect listed animal
species, or to attempt to engage in such
conduct’’ (16 U.S.C. 1538). ‘‘Harm’’
includes significant habitat modification
or degradation that actually kills or
injures listed wildlife by significantly
impairing essential behavioral patterns
such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering
(50 CFR 17.3). However, under section
10(a) of the ESA, the Service may issue
permits to authorize incidental take of
listed species. ‘‘Incidental taking’’ is
defined by the ESA implementing
regulations as taking that is incidental
to, and not the purpose of, carrying out
an otherwise lawful activity (50 CFR
17.3). Regulations governing incidental
take permits for endangered and
threatened species, respectively, are
found in the Code of Federal
Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR
17.32.
Applicant’s Proposed Project
The applicant requests a 5-year permit
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. If
we approve the permit, the applicant
anticipates taking gnatcatcher as a result
of permanent impacts to 5.78 acres (ac)
of coastal sage scrub habitat that the
species uses for breeding, feeding, and
sheltering, as well as 2.85 ac of
nonnative grassland habitat that may
support gnatcatcher foraging and/or
dispersal. The take would be incidental
to the applicant’s activities associated
with the construction of the Olinda
Alpha Landfill projects in the City of
Brea, California, and includes
restoration and in-perpetuity
E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM
01DEN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Notices
preservation and management of 11.56
ac of gnatcatcher habitat.
The Olinda Alpha Landfill projects
propose to construct a desilting basin,
perform a partial cap closure, install
screening trees for the Brea Power Plant,
and construct a winch concrete pad on
12.56 ac located on the 565-ac Olinda
Alpha Landfill property in the City of
Brea. The project will permanently
impact 5.78 ac of coastal California
gnatcatcher-occupied coastal sage scrub
habitat as a result of clearing and
grading activities.
To minimize take of coastal California
gnatcatcher by the Olinda Alpha
Landfill projects and to offset impacts to
its habitat, the applicant proposes to
mitigate for permanent impacts to 5.78
ac of occupied gnatcatcher coastal sage
scrub habitat through the restoration,
conservation, and in-perpetuity
management of 11.56 ac of coastal sage
scrub suitable for the gnatcatcher by a
Service-approved restoration contractor
and the Puente Hills Habitat
Preservation Authority. The applicant’s
proposed HCP also contains the
following proposed measures to
minimize the effects of construction
activities on the gnatcatcher:
• Prior to the initiation of work
activities on the project sites, grading
limits will be clearly delineated with
flagging and/or temporary fencing and
silt fencing, as necessary, to help guide
work activities and avoid impacts to
areas beyond the project boundaries.
• Prior to the initiation of work
activities on the project sites, a Serviceapproved biologist will conduct a brief
training session for all project personnel
regarding the conservation measures
and regulations described herein, as
well as general information and
methods that will help avoid and
minimize disturbance to the gnatcatcher
in the vicinity of project activities.
• A Service-approved biologist will
monitor grading of the site daily (or as
determined necessary by the monitoring
biologist) and provide a letter
summarizing compliance with this HCP
and the construction limits of the
proposed projects to the Service within
1 month of completion of grading.
• Vegetation clearing will take place
outside of the bird nesting season
(February 15 through August 31) to the
fullest extent practicable. Clearing may
only occur during this period once a
Service-approved biologist has
conducted at least three surveys of the
impact areas for nesting birds, with each
survey taking place 1 week apart, and
the last survey conducted within 24
hours prior to clearing. The qualified
biologist will document compliance
with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
other applicable regulations that protect
nesting birds. If an active bird nest is
observed, a 300-foot buffer must be
established, within which no project
activities will occur until the nest is no
longer active. A reduced buffer may be
established by the monitoring biologist
if it is deemed appropriate and will not
result in the alteration of nesting
behaviors. To fulfill this measure, all
project activities that are deemed
necessary to occur during the bird
nesting season will be monitored by the
qualified biologist, as well as any active
nest detected in the vicinity of project
activities.
• Project sites will be kept as clean as
possible to avoid attracting predators.
All food-related trash will be placed in
sealed bins or removed from the site
regularly.
• Staging areas for each project will
be limited to developed or previously
disturbed areas.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
The Proposed Action consists of the
issuance of an incidental take permit
and implementation of the proposed
HCP, which includes measures to avoid,
minimize, and mitigate impacts to the
gnatcatcher. If we approve the permit,
take of gnatcatcher would be authorized
for the applicant’s activities associated
with the construction of the Olinda
Alpha Landfill projects. In the proposed
HCP, the applicant considers
alternatives to the taking of gnatcatcher
under the proposed action. Alternative
development configurations for each
project component were considered;
however, because of site-specific
regulatory requirements and the
topography of the site, further avoidance
of impacts to coastal California
gnatcatcher habitat could not be
achieved. The applicant also considered
the No Action Alternative. Under the No
Action Alternative, no incidental take of
coastal California gnatcatcher resulting
from habitat modification would occur,
and no long-term protection and
management would be afforded to the
species.
Our Preliminary Determination
The Service has made a preliminary
determination that approval of the HCP
and issuance of an incidental take
permit qualify for categorical exclusion
under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as
provided by the Department of the
Interior implementing regulations in
part 46 of title 43 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (43 CFR 46.205, 46.210, and
46.215), and that the HCP qualifies as a
low-effect plan as defined by the Habitat
Conservation Planning Handbook
(December 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56991
We base our determination that a HCP
qualifies as a low-effect plan on the
following three criteria:
(1) Implementation of the HCP would
result in minor or negligible effects on
federally listed, proposed, and
candidate species and their habitats;
(2) Implementation of the HCP would
result in minor or negligible effects on
other environmental values or
resources; and
(3) Impacts of the HCP, considered
together with the impacts of other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable
similarly situated projects, would not
result, over time, in cumulative effects
to environmental values or resources
that would be considered significant.
Based upon this preliminary
determination, we do not intend to
prepare further NEPA documentation.
We will consider public comments in
making the final determination on
whether to prepare such additional
documentation.
Next Steps
We will evaluate the proposed HCP
and comments we receive to determine
whether the permit application meets
the requirements and issuance criteria
under section 10(a) of the ESA (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). We will also
evaluate whether issuance of a section
10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permit would
comply with section 7 of the ESA by
conducting an intra-Service
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 and issuance
criteria under section 10(a) are met, we
will issue the permit to the applicant for
incidental take of gnatcatcher.
Public Comments
If you wish to comment on the permit
application, proposed HCP, and
associated documents, you may submit
comments by any of the methods noted
in the ADDRESSES section.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, email 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 may 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.
E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM
01DEN1
56992
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 230 / Friday, December 1, 2017 / Notices
Authority
We provide this notice under section
10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)
and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
Scott A. Sobiech,
Acting Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California.
[FR Doc. 2017–25889 Filed 11–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Kofi E. Shaw-Taylor, M.D. Decision and
Order
On June 12, 2017, the Assistant
Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement
Administration (hereinafter, DEA or
Government), issued an Order to Show
Cause to Kofi E. Shaw-Taylor, M.D.
(hereinafter, Respondent) of Baltimore,
Maryland. GX 1. The Show Cause Order
proposed the revocation of
Respondent’s Certificate of Registration
on the ground that Respondent does
‘‘not have authority to handle controlled
substances in the State of Maryland,’’
the State in which he is registered. GX
1, at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f) and
§ 824(a)(3)).
As to the Agency’s jurisdiction, the
Show Cause Order alleged that
Respondent holds DEA Certificate of
Registration No. AS2145476 which
authorizes him to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V as
a practitioner at the registered address
of 4419 Falls Road, Suite C, Baltimore,
Maryland 21211. GX 1, at 1. See also GX
2 (Controlled Substance Registration
Certificate) (including ‘‘Westside
Medical Group’’). The Show Cause
Order alleged that this registration
expires on February 29, 2020. GX 1, at
1. See also GX 2.
As the substantive ground for the
proceeding, the Show Cause Order
alleged that Respondent is ‘‘without
authority to handle controlled
substances in Maryland, the state in
which . . . [he is] registered with the
DEA.’’ GX 1, at 1. It further alleged that,
on May 9, 2017, Respondent’s
‘‘authority to prescribe and administer
controlled substances in the State of
Maryland was suspended.’’ GX 1, at 1.
See also GX 3 (Maryland State Board of
Physicians Order of Summary
Suspension of License to Practice
Medicine, hereinafter Order of
Summary Suspension). The Show Cause
Order alleged that ‘‘DEA must revoke
. . . [his] DEA . . . [registration] based
upon . . . [his] lack of authority to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:44 Nov 30, 2017
Jkt 244001
handle controlled substances in the
State of Maryland.’’ GX 1, at 1 (citing 21
U.S.C. 802(21), 823(f)(1), and 824(a)(3)).
The Show Cause Order notified
Respondent of his right to request a
hearing on the allegations or to submit
a written statement while waiving his
right to a hearing, the procedures for
electing each option, and the
consequences for failing to elect either
option. GX 1, at 2 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). The Show Cause Order also
notified Respondent of the opportunity
to submit a corrective action plan. GX
1, at 2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C)).
By letter dated July 17, 2017
addressed to the Office of the [DEA]
Administrative Law Judges,
Respondent, by his counsel, requested a
hearing. GX 5, at 1. The letter admitted
that the Maryland State Board of
Physicians issued an Order of Summary
Suspension of Respondent’s license to
practice medicine on May 9, 2017. Id.
According to the letter, Respondent was
challenging that Order ‘‘on grounds of
abuse of and lack of due process.’’ Id.
On July 24, 2017, the Chief
Administrative Law Judge, John J.
Mulrooney, II, ordered the Government
to file proof of service and evidence in
support of its allegation that Respondent
lacked State authority to practice
medicine. GX 6, at 1 (Order Directing
the Filing of Proof of Service and
Government Evidence of Lack of State
Authority Allegation and Briefing
Schedule). The Order also established a
briefing schedule ‘‘if the Government
files a motion based on timeliness of the
hearing request and/or a motion for
summary disposition based on its
allegation that the Respondent lacks
state authority to handle controlled
substances.’’ Id. at 1–2.
By submission dated July 28, 2017,
Respondent, by his counsel, submitted
an ‘‘Order to Show Cause Waiver of
Hearing and Statement on the Matter.’’
GX 7. According to that submission,
Respondent’s counsel stated that
Respondent was served with the Show
Cause Order on June 20, 2017. GX 7, at
1. He also stated that Respondent was
waiving a hearing on the Show Cause
Order. Id. Further, the submission
admitted that the Maryland State Board
of Physicians issued an Order of
Summary Suspension of Respondent’s
license to practice medicine,
characterizing the Order as being ‘‘based
on alleged but unproven charges.’’ Id. It
expressed ‘‘our fervent belief that the
Respondent shall prevail in this matter
and his Medical license reinstated.’’ Id.
It asked that ‘‘the DEA suspend the
revocation’’ of Respondent’s registration
‘‘pending the restoration of the Medical
license to save the Respondent the
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
inconvenience, trauma and the lengthy
process of reapplication of this same
license.’’ Id.
By Order dated August 2, 2017, the
Chief Administrative Law Judge
terminated the proceedings based on
Respondent’s ‘‘Order to Show Cause
Waiver of Hearing and Statement on the
Matter.’’ GX 8, at 1 (Order Terminating
Proceedings).
On August 2, 2017, the Government
submitted a Request for Final Agency
Action and an evidentiary record to
support the Show Cause Order’s
allegation.
I find that the Government’s service of
the Show Cause Order on Respondent
was legally sufficient. I find that, by
letter from his counsel dated July 17,
2017, Respondent requested a hearing. I
find that, by submission of his counsel
dated July 28, 2017, Respondent sought
to file an ‘‘Order to Show Cause Waiver
of Hearing and Statement on the
Matter.’’ Respondent was entitled to
waive his right to a hearing and to fail
to follow up on his request for a hearing.
See 21 CFR 1301.43(d). DEA
regulations, however, limit the time for
Respondent to exercise his right to
submit a written statement of position to
‘‘the period permitted for filing a
request for a hearing or a notice of
appearance,’’ absent a showing of good
cause. 21 CFR 1301.43(c). Respondent’s
‘‘Statement on the Matter’’ was not filed
within the period specified in the
regulation, and Respondent did not
make a showing of good cause to excuse
the untimeliness. I decline, therefore, to
consider any factual assertions or
arguments that Respondent raised in the
‘‘Statement on the Matter.’’ 1 I issue this
Decision and Order based on the record
submitted by the Government and on
Respondent’s request for a hearing. 21
CFR 1301.43(e).
Findings of Fact
Respondent’s DEA Registration
Respondent currently holds DEA
practitioner registration AS2145476
authorizing him to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V at
the address of Westside Medical Group,
4419 Falls Road, Suite C, Baltimore,
Maryland 21211. GX 1, at 1; GX 2. This
registration expires on February 29,
2020. Id.
1 Respondent’s ‘‘Statement on the Matter’’ did not
claim that Respondent’s medical license had been
reinstated. To the contrary, it reiterated
Respondent’s admission that the Maryland State
Board of Physicians issued an Order of Summary
Suspension of Respondent’s medical license.
E:\FR\FM\01DEN1.SGM
01DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 230 (Friday, December 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56990-56992]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25889]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-ES-2017-N107; FXES11140800000-178-FF08ECAR00]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Incidental Take
Permit Application; Proposed Low-Effect Habitat Conservation Plan for
the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Associated Documents; Brea,
California
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have received an
application from Orange County Waste & Recycling for a 5-year
incidental take permit for the threatened coastal California
gnatcatcher pursuant to the Endangered Species Act. We are requesting
comments on the permit application and on our preliminary determination
that the applicant's accompanying proposed habitat conservation plan
qualifies as low effect, eligible for a categorical exclusion under the
National Environmental Policy Act. The basis for this determination is
discussed in our environmental action statement and associated low-
effect screening form, which are also available for public review.
DATES: Written comments should be received on or before January 2,
2018.
ADDRESSES: Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the
following methods:
U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service,
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 2177 Salk Avenue, Suite 250,
Carlsbad, CA 92008.
Fax: Field Supervisor, 760-431-9624.
Email: fw8cfwocomments@fws.gov; please include ``Olinda
Alpha Landfill HCP'' in the subject line.
Obtaining Documents: You may obtain copies of the proposed HCP and
EAS on the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife's HCP Web site at https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/HCPs/HCP_Docs.html. To request copies of the
application, proposed HCP, and EAS, contact the Service immediately, by
telephone at 760-431-9440 or by letter to the Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). Copies of the proposed HCP and EAS
also are available for public inspection during regular business hours
at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Karen Goebel, Assistant Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES);
telephone: 760-431-9440. If you use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD), please call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 800-877-
8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service), have received an application from Orange County Waste &
Recycling (applicant) for a 5-year incidental take permit for one
covered species pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA). The
application addresses the potential ``take'' of the threatened coastal
California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica;
gnatcatcher) in the course of activities associated with the
construction, operation, and maintenance of the Olinda Alpha Landfill
projects, in the City of Brea, Orange County, California. A
conservation program to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for project
activities would be implemented as described in the applicant's
proposed habitat conservation plan (HCP).
We are requesting comments on the permit application and on our
preliminary determination that the proposed HCP qualifies as a low-
effect HCP, eligible for a categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.;
NEPA). The basis for this determination is discussed in our
environmental action statement (EAS) and associated low-effect
screening form, which are also available for public review.
Background
Section 9 of the ESA and its implementing Federal regulations
prohibit the take of animal species listed as endangered or threatened.
``Take'' is defined under the ESA as to ``harass, harm, pursue, hunt,
shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed animal species, or
to attempt to engage in such conduct'' (16 U.S.C. 1538). ``Harm''
includes significant habitat modification or degradation that actually
kills or injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential
behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR
17.3). However, under section 10(a) of the ESA, the Service may issue
permits to authorize incidental take of listed species. ``Incidental
taking'' is defined by the ESA implementing regulations as taking that
is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise
lawful activity (50 CFR 17.3). Regulations governing incidental take
permits for endangered and threatened species, respectively, are found
in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 17.22 and 50 CFR 17.32.
Applicant's Proposed Project
The applicant requests a 5-year permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) of
the ESA. If we approve the permit, the applicant anticipates taking
gnatcatcher as a result of permanent impacts to 5.78 acres (ac) of
coastal sage scrub habitat that the species uses for breeding, feeding,
and sheltering, as well as 2.85 ac of nonnative grassland habitat that
may support gnatcatcher foraging and/or dispersal. The take would be
incidental to the applicant's activities associated with the
construction of the Olinda Alpha Landfill projects in the City of Brea,
California, and includes restoration and in-perpetuity
[[Page 56991]]
preservation and management of 11.56 ac of gnatcatcher habitat.
The Olinda Alpha Landfill projects propose to construct a desilting
basin, perform a partial cap closure, install screening trees for the
Brea Power Plant, and construct a winch concrete pad on 12.56 ac
located on the 565-ac Olinda Alpha Landfill property in the City of
Brea. The project will permanently impact 5.78 ac of coastal California
gnatcatcher-occupied coastal sage scrub habitat as a result of clearing
and grading activities.
To minimize take of coastal California gnatcatcher by the Olinda
Alpha Landfill projects and to offset impacts to its habitat, the
applicant proposes to mitigate for permanent impacts to 5.78 ac of
occupied gnatcatcher coastal sage scrub habitat through the
restoration, conservation, and in-perpetuity management of 11.56 ac of
coastal sage scrub suitable for the gnatcatcher by a Service-approved
restoration contractor and the Puente Hills Habitat Preservation
Authority. The applicant's proposed HCP also contains the following
proposed measures to minimize the effects of construction activities on
the gnatcatcher:
Prior to the initiation of work activities on the project
sites, grading limits will be clearly delineated with flagging and/or
temporary fencing and silt fencing, as necessary, to help guide work
activities and avoid impacts to areas beyond the project boundaries.
Prior to the initiation of work activities on the project
sites, a Service-approved biologist will conduct a brief training
session for all project personnel regarding the conservation measures
and regulations described herein, as well as general information and
methods that will help avoid and minimize disturbance to the
gnatcatcher in the vicinity of project activities.
A Service-approved biologist will monitor grading of the
site daily (or as determined necessary by the monitoring biologist) and
provide a letter summarizing compliance with this HCP and the
construction limits of the proposed projects to the Service within 1
month of completion of grading.
Vegetation clearing will take place outside of the bird
nesting season (February 15 through August 31) to the fullest extent
practicable. Clearing may only occur during this period once a Service-
approved biologist has conducted at least three surveys of the impact
areas for nesting birds, with each survey taking place 1 week apart,
and the last survey conducted within 24 hours prior to clearing. The
qualified biologist will document compliance with the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act and other applicable regulations that protect nesting birds.
If an active bird nest is observed, a 300-foot buffer must be
established, within which no project activities will occur until the
nest is no longer active. A reduced buffer may be established by the
monitoring biologist if it is deemed appropriate and will not result in
the alteration of nesting behaviors. To fulfill this measure, all
project activities that are deemed necessary to occur during the bird
nesting season will be monitored by the qualified biologist, as well as
any active nest detected in the vicinity of project activities.
Project sites will be kept as clean as possible to avoid
attracting predators. All food-related trash will be placed in sealed
bins or removed from the site regularly.
Staging areas for each project will be limited to
developed or previously disturbed areas.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
The Proposed Action consists of the issuance of an incidental take
permit and implementation of the proposed HCP, which includes measures
to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to the gnatcatcher. If we
approve the permit, take of gnatcatcher would be authorized for the
applicant's activities associated with the construction of the Olinda
Alpha Landfill projects. In the proposed HCP, the applicant considers
alternatives to the taking of gnatcatcher under the proposed action.
Alternative development configurations for each project component were
considered; however, because of site-specific regulatory requirements
and the topography of the site, further avoidance of impacts to coastal
California gnatcatcher habitat could not be achieved. The applicant
also considered the No Action Alternative. Under the No Action
Alternative, no incidental take of coastal California gnatcatcher
resulting from habitat modification would occur, and no long-term
protection and management would be afforded to the species.
Our Preliminary Determination
The Service has made a preliminary determination that approval of
the HCP and issuance of an incidental take permit qualify for
categorical exclusion under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), as provided
by the Department of the Interior implementing regulations in part 46
of title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations (43 CFR 46.205, 46.210,
and 46.215), and that the HCP qualifies as a low-effect plan as defined
by the Habitat Conservation Planning Handbook (December 2016).
We base our determination that a HCP qualifies as a low-effect plan
on the following three criteria:
(1) Implementation of the HCP would result in minor or negligible
effects on federally listed, proposed, and candidate species and their
habitats;
(2) Implementation of the HCP would result in minor or negligible
effects on other environmental values or resources; and
(3) Impacts of the HCP, considered together with the impacts of
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable similarly situated
projects, would not result, over time, in cumulative effects to
environmental values or resources that would be considered significant.
Based upon this preliminary determination, we do not intend to
prepare further NEPA documentation. We will consider public comments in
making the final determination on whether to prepare such additional
documentation.
Next Steps
We will evaluate the proposed HCP and comments we receive to
determine whether the permit application meets the requirements and
issuance criteria under section 10(a) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). We will also evaluate whether issuance of a section 10(a)(1)(B)
incidental take permit would comply with section 7 of the ESA by
conducting an intra-Service 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 and issuance criteria under section 10(a) are met, we will
issue the permit to the applicant for incidental take of gnatcatcher.
Public Comments
If you wish to comment on the permit application, proposed HCP, and
associated documents, you may submit comments by any of the methods
noted in the ADDRESSES section.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, email 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 may
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.
[[Page 56992]]
Authority
We provide this notice under section 10 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
Scott A. Sobiech,
Acting Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad,
California.
[FR Doc. 2017-25889 Filed 11-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
