Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Upper Maple River Watershed Plan, North Dakota, 40194-40197 [2023-13129]

Agencies

• Natural Resources Conservation Service
• Deparment of Agriculture

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40194-40197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-13129]


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

DEPARMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation Service

[Docket No. NRCS-2023-0008]


Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Upper Maple River Watershed Plan, North Dakota

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service, Department of 
Agriculture.

ACTION: Notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact 
statement (EIS).

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

SUMMARY: The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) North Dakota 
State Office, announces its intent to prepare an EIS for the Upper 
Maple River Watershed located within Cass, Barnes, Steele, and Griggs 
Counties, North Dakota. NRCS will examine alternative solutions through 
the EIS process to provide watershed protection. NRCS is requesting 
comments to identify significant issues, potential alternatives, 
information, and analyses relevant to the Proposed Action from all 
interested individuals, Federal and State Agencies, and Tribes.

DATES: We will consider comments that we receive by August 7, 2023. 
Comments received after the close of the comment period will be 
considered to the extent possible.

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments in response to this notice. 
You may submit your comments through one of the methods below:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for docket ID NRCS-2023-0008. Follow the 
online instructions for submitting comments; or
     Mail or Hand Delivery: Carol Lewis, Cass County Joint 
Water Resource District, 1201 Main Avenue West, West Fargo, ND 58078-
1301. In your comment, specify the docket ID NRCS-2023-0008.
    All comments received will be posted and made publicly available on 
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Fisher; telephone: (701) 530-
2091; email: [email protected]. Individuals who require 
alternative means of communication should contact USDA Target Center at 
(202) 720-2600 (voice).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need

    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS) are cooperating federal agencies in the watershed 
planning effort. NRCS is the lead federal agency implementing the 
National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic 
Preservation Act (NHPA). An interagency team consisting of the 
following agencies are participating in the planning effort: Federal 
Emergency Management Agency; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 
North Dakota Department of Water Resources (ND DWR); North Dakota 
Department of Environmental Quality; North Dakota Game and Fish 
Department; North Dakota Department of Transportation; Cass County 
Joint Water Resource District; Cass County Highway Department; Cass 
County Sheriff's Office; Cass County Commission; Cass County Emergency 
Management; City of Amenia; and City of Casselton. NRCS is consulting 
on both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and section 106 of 
the NHPA with the North Dakota State Historical Preservation Office and 
31 Tribal Nations.
    The primary purpose of the proposed action is watershed protection. 
The proposed action will also result in flood damage reduction to 
cropland, structures, roads, drain ditches, structures, and vehicles in 
the watershed. Watershed protection goals consist of reducing nutrient 
loads from the watershed, particularly dissolved phosphorus, and 
increasing quantity and quality of wetlands and wildlife habitat.
    The Watershed Project Plan is authorized under the authority of the 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 (Pub. L. 83-566), 
as amended, and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program Project 
(16 U.S.C. chapter 58, Subchapter VIII). This action is needed because:
     The Upper Maple River Watershed, with a drainage area of 
186,400 acres, annually contributes an estimated 30,200 pounds of 
phosphorus and 331,600 pounds of nitrogen to the Red River downstream. 
Approximately 88 percent of the watershed is farmed for row crops 
consisting predominantly of soybeans, corn, spring wheat, dry beans, 
and sunflowers.
     The average slope of the Upper Maple River is 4 foot per 
mile and the downstream Red River averages 1 foot per mile. The low 
topographic relief landscape results in floods over wide swaths of 
cropland for long durations, allowing for phosphorus dissolution from 
soils and vegetation into the overlying stagnant floodwaters. Within 
the Upper Maple Watershed, 17,684 acres of cropland are inundated by 
the 2-year recurrence interval (RI) flood event, 29,418 acres at the 
10-year RI flood, and 37,246 acres are inundated by a 100-year RI 
flood.
     In addition to generating nutrient transport from cropland 
to the Maple River, the average annual flood inundation of 12,600 acres 
of cropland generates $2.1 million annual damages to agricultural 
producers. Total economic losses due to flooding, considering damage to 
cropland, structures, roads, drain ditches, structures, and vehicles in 
the watershed are estimated at $3.8 million a year.
     Agricultural non-point source nutrient loads in the Red 
River are of international significance. The Red River discharges to 
Lake Winnipeg, the 10th largest freshwater lake in the world, also 
designated one of the most eutrophic large lakes \1\ in the world. 
Eutrophication has resulted in negative effects on the aquatic food web 
within the lake, resulting in declines to critical species which 
support recreational and commercial fisheries, tourism, and subsistence 
fishing of indigenous people. While the Red River contributes only 10 
to 15 percent of overall annual runoff to the lake by volume, it

[[Page 40195]]

contributes 69 percent of the total phosphorus load, largely in the 
form of inorganic dissolved phosphorus, and it is also a major 
contributor of nitrogen. Nitrogen loads have remained relatively stable 
in the Red River since 2000, however phosphorus loads at the U.S. and 
Canadian border have continued to steadily increase over the last two 
decades despite significant USDA-NRCS program investments in the 
installation of on-farm conservation practices throughout the North 
Dakota and Minnesota portions of the Red River Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A eutrophic lake is rich in nutrients and supports a dense 
phytoplankton or plant population, the respiration and decomposition 
of which results in depletion of dissolved oxygen levels. 
Eutrophication generates adverse effects on aquatic species due to 
zones of low dissolved oxygen in the lake and impacts recreation, 
public safety, and drinking water supply due to algal blooms on the 
lake surface.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Cropland conservation practices promoted by NRCS are 
effective at reducing particulate bound phosphorus, nitrogen, and 
sediment loss; however, have been largely ineffective in reducing 
dissolved phosphorus runoff from cropland in this watershed. This is 
demonstrated not just in the upward trend of dissolved phosphorus at 
the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gauge on the international border, 
but through published research from Red River Basin study sites. Other 
flood prone, flat, cold climate, agricultural landscapes with 
predominantly fine-grained soils, such as those found in Finland, 
Sweden, and the Netherlands, experience similar challenges with 
dissolved phosphorus management.
     Federal investment in nutrient reduction within the Red 
River Basin is an important contribution to the Boundary Waters Treaty 
(BWT) obligation of the United States. Article IV of the BWT states 
that ``boundary waters or waters flowing across the boundary shall not 
be polluted to the injury of health and property to the other.'' The 
International Joint Commission (IJC) acts as the arbitral body for the 
BWT, with the Red River Basin Commission (RRBC) established as a sub-
entity between the two countries for management in the international 
Red River Basin. In 2020, based on the recommendations of the RRBC, the 
IJC adopted nutrient concentration objectives for the international 
border crossing of the Red River. Meeting the target for phosphorus 
will require an approximately 50 percent reduction in the average 
concentrations from the last two decades, which in turn will require 
implementation of new and innovative techniques for phosphorus 
reduction from cropland. U.S. negotiations with the Canadian government 
for similar investments to protect U.S. waterways from pollutants 
originating in Canada, through the IJC, will be bolstered by U.S. 
investments in the Red River Basin.
     The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) in the northcentral Great 
Plains is one of the most threatened waterfowl habitats in the United 
States. The Red River Valley is one of the largest artificially drained 
landscapes in the world, with hundreds of miles of publicly owned 
drainage ditches, privately owned lateral ditches, and thousands of 
acres of surface tile drains. The remaining wetlands and grasslands of 
the PPR are one of the most productive areas in the world for breeding 
waterfowl and are important habitat for migratory grassland and shore 
birds as well. Drainage of remaining wetlands continues in the region, 
from 1997 to 2009 more than 50,000 individual wetlands were lost within 
North Dakota alone, a -3.3 percent overall change.

Preliminary Proposed Action and Alternatives

    The Upper Maple Watershed planning process was initiated in 2016 
with a public scoping meeting, which was not advertised in the Federal 
Register because it was assumed that an Environmental Assessment would 
be completed for the project. Through the course of the planning 
process since 2016, 38 different alternatives were evaluated with 
comments solicited. Based on technical analysis results and comments, 
all but one alternative was selected. Both the EIS and the second 
public scoping meeting, dated May 30, 2023, will provide a summary of 
the preliminary alternatives analysis and opportunity for input. The 
EIS is expected to evaluate two alternatives: one action alternative 
and one no action alternative. The alternatives we intend to carry 
forward to final analysis are:
    Alternative 1--No Action: Taking no action would mean that no 
federal action would be taken in the Upper Maple River Watershed and 
implementation of significant flood damage reduction or watershed 
protection projects would not occur. The watershed will continue to 
contribute an average of 19,841 pounds of phosphorus and 50,223 pounds 
of nitrogen annually to the Maple River, and the downstream Red River 
and Lake Winnipeg. Wetlands and wildlife habitat will remain unchanged 
barring a significant change in federal conservation programs.
    Alternative 2--Upper Maple River Site 2A (Proposed Action): Upper 
Maple River Site 2A would be a multi-purpose dry dam with interior 
features designed and operated for the purpose of dissolved phosphorus 
(DP) and nitrogen reduction, and wetlands and uplands managed for 
wildlife habitat. The primary dam structure would provide 2,863 acre-
feet of temporary (less than 10 days inundation at the 10-year 
recurrence interval flood) floodwater retention for a 59.7 square mile 
drainage area and would consist of a 2.3-mile embankment with a maximum 
height of 31 feet, 48-inch principal spillway conduit, and structural 
concrete auxiliary spillway. Reduction of dissolved inorganic 
phosphorus will be through two primary means. The first involves 
construction and operation of three shallow retention cells, totaling 
240 acres, on the interior of the dry dam to which water would be 
routed and held to depths of 2 to 3 feet through the growing season. 
Vegetation would uptake DP as it grows and in the early fall the cells 
would be drained via automated control structures and tile drains below 
the cells to allow vegetation to be cut, baled, and removed from cells 
prior to the first frost in 2 out of 3 years. The second primary means 
of DP reduction occurs through reducing the extents, frequency, and 
duration of cropland inundation downstream of the dam through 
modification of the peak flow hydrograph. The alternative would also 
result in enhancement of approximately 200 acres of existing wetlands, 
and enhancement of approximately 500 acres of uplands which would be 
managed to maximize wildlife habitat benefits.

Summary of Expected Impacts

    An NRCS evaluation of this federally assisted action indicates that 
the proposed alternative may have a significant local, regional, 
national, or international impact on the environment. Hydrologic 
impacts include peak flow reductions of 82 percent and 56 percent of 
the 10- and 100-year recurrence interval flood events immediately 
downstream of the retention site, and 14 percent and 19 percent of the 
10- and 100-year recurrence interval flood events at the downstream 
confluence between Maple River and unnamed tributary which site 2A is 
located. Immediately downstream of the retention site, average annual 
loads of total phosphorus, total nitrogen, and total suspended solids 
are reduced by 60 percent, 66 percent, and 38 percent respectively. The 
proposed alternative would result in a total loss of 21.4 acres of 
wetlands through fill placement, excavation, which will be mitigated 
via onsite wetland restoration. The project is expected to generate a 
net increase of 230.3 acres of wetlands and enhances approximately 30 
acres of existing wetlands because of restored hydrology and vegetative 
communities, and enhancement of approximately 500 acres upland wildlife 
habitat for the benefit of migratory birds and other

[[Page 40196]]

wildlife species. Short term negative impacts during construction are 
anticipated to be local only, and may occur in relation to soils, 
vegetation, noise, and traffic.

Anticipated Permits and Authorizations

    The following permits and other authorizations are anticipated to 
be required:
     CWA Section 404 permit. Implementation of the proposed 
federal action would require a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit 
from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is a cooperating federal 
agency on the planning effort. Consultation is ongoing and no 
significant challenges are anticipated given the overall environmental 
benefits of the project.
     CWA Section 401 permit. The project would also require 
water quality certification under Section 401 of the CWA and permitting 
under Section 402 of the CWA (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
Permit), both of which would be issued by the North Dakota Department 
of Environmental Quality, which is participating on the interagency 
team for the watershed plan. Consultation is ongoing and no significant 
challenges are anticipated given the overall environmental benefits of 
the project.
     Permit to Construct or Modify a Dam. The project will 
require authorization from the ND DWR for construction of a dam. ND DWR 
is participating on the interagency team for the watershed plan and has 
also provided funding for the planning effort. No significant 
challenges are anticipated given the project is being designed to meet 
State of North Dakota dam safety standards.
     Water Appropriation Permit. The project may require a 
conditional water use permit from ND DWR for construction of a dam that 
will temporarily retain water during flood events. ND DWR is 
participating on the interagency team for the watershed plan and has 
also provided funding for the planning effort.
     Floodplain Permit. The project will require a floodplain 
development permit from Cass County. Cass County is participating on 
the interagency team for the watershed plan and no significant 
challenges are expected given the beneficial flood damage reduction 
effects of the project.
     NHPA Section 106 Consultation. Consultation with 31 Tribal 
Nations and the North Dakota State Historical Society is ongoing, as 
required by the NHPA. To date no concerns have been raised about NHPA, 
however consultation is ongoing.

Schedule of Decision-Making Process

    A draft EIS will be prepared and circulated for review and comment 
by agencies and the public for at least 45 days per 40 CFR 1503.1, 
1502.2, 1506.11, 1502.17, and 7 CFR 650.13. The draft EIS is 
anticipated to be published in the Federal Register approximately 6 
months after publication of this NOI. A final EIS is anticipated to be 
published within 6 months of completion of the public comment period 
for the draft EIS. NRCS will then decide whether to implement one of 
the alternatives as evaluated in the EIS.
    NRCS will provide technical and financial assistance for the 
proposed project through the NRCS Watershed Protection and Flood 
Prevention Program if an action is selected. A Record of Decision will 
be completed after the required 30-day waiting period and will be 
publicly available. The responsible Federal official for the NRCS is 
Nathan Jones, North Dakota Acting State Conservationist.

Public Scoping Process

    Public scoping meetings will be held to further develop the scope 
of the draft EIS. A preliminary scoping meeting was held on February 
24, 2016, in Casselton, ND. An additional public scoping meeting was 
held on May 30, 2023. The meeting was virtual only. A recording of the 
meeting may be accessed at: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservation-basics/conservation-by-state/north-dakota/upper-maple-river-watershed-plan.
    Comments received for both meetings, including names and addresses 
of those who comment, will be part of the public record.
    NRCS will coordinate the scoping process as provided in 36 CFR 
800.2(d)(3) and 800.8 (54 U.S.C. 306108) to help fulfill the NHPA, as 
amended, review process. The USACE and USFWS have declined to 
participate in the NRCS led NHPA process and instead intend to use 
their agency specific NHPA processes.

Identification of Potential Alternatives, Information, and Analyses

    NRCS invites agencies, Tribes, and individuals who have special 
expertise, legal jurisdiction, or interest in the Upper Maple Watershed 
and the Red River Basin to provide comments concerning the scope of the 
analysis and identification of potential alternatives, information, and 
analyses relevant to the Proposed Action in writing.

Authorities

    This document is published pursuant to NEPA regulations regarding 
publication of a notice of intent to issue an EIS (40 CFR 1501.9(d)). 
The EIS will be prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts as 
required by section 102(2)(C) of NEPA, the Council on Environmental 
Quality regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508); and NRCS regulations that 
implement NEPA in 7 CFR part 650 and 7 CFR 622. Watershed planning is 
authorized under the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 
1954, as amended, (Pub. L. 83-566) and the Flood Control Act of 1944 
(Pub. L. 78-534).

Federal Assistance Program

    The title and number of the Federal Assistance Programs, as found 
in the Assistance Listing,\2\ to which this document applies is 10.904, 
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See https://sam.gov/content/assistance-listings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Executive Order 12372

    Executive Order 12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal 
Programs,'' requires consultation with State and local officials that 
would be directly affected by proposed Federal financial assistance. 
The objectives of the Executive Order are to foster an 
intergovernmental partnership and a strengthened federalism, by relying 
on State and local processes for State and local government 
coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and 
direct Federal development. This program is subject to the provisions 
of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation 
with State and local officials.

USDA Non-Discrimination Policy

    In accordance with Federal civil rights law and USDA civil rights 
regulations and policies, USDA, its agencies, offices, and employees, 
and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are 
prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, 
religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual 
orientation, disability, age, marital status, family or parental 
status, income derived from a public assistance program, political 
beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in 
any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases 
apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by 
program or incident.
    Individuals who require alternative means of communication for 
program information (for example, braille, large print, audiotape, 
American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the

[[Page 40197]]

responsible Agency or USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and 
text telephone) or dial 711 for Telecommunications Relay Service (both 
voice and text telephone users can initiate this call from any phone). 
Additionally, program information may be made available in languages 
other than English.
    To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA 
Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at https://www.usda.gov/oascr/how-to-file-program-discrimination-complaint and at 
any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the 
letter all the information requested in the form. To request a copy of 
the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or 
letter to USDA by mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, 
Washington, DC 20250-9410 or email: [email protected].
    USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Nathan Jones,
North Dakota Acting State Conservationist, Natural Resources 
Conservation Service.
[FR Doc. 2023-13129 Filed 6-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-P