Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 58181

Permit No.: TE–092476

Applicant: Scott Quinnell, Yucaipa, 

California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (survey by pursuit) the Quino 

checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha quino) in conjunction with 

surveys throughout the range of the 

species in California for the purpose of 

enhancing its survival. 

Permit No.: TE–091462

Applicant: Karen Drewe, Irvine, 

California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (harass by survey) the Quino 

checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha quino) in conjunction with 

surveys throughout the range of the 

species in California for the purpose of 

enhancing its survival. 

Permit No.: TE–090990

Applicant: The Catalina Island 

Conservancy, Avalon, California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (harass by survey, capture, handle, 

measure, sex, insert passive integrated 

transponder tags, radio-collar, vaccinate, 

administer veterinary medical 

treatments, captive propagate, collect 

blood and fecal samples, transport, and 

release) the Santa Catalina Island fox 

(Urocyon littoralis catalinae; fox) in 

conjunction with scientific research on 

the fox and feral cats, and feral goat and 

pig removal on Santa Catalina Island, 

California, for the purpose of enhancing 

its survival. 

Permit No.: TE–093151

Applicant: Richard Rivas, Fair Oaks, 

California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (capture and collect and sacrifice) 

the Conservancy fairy shrimp 

(Branchinecta conservatio), the 

longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 

longiantenna), the Riverside fairy 

shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni), the 

San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 

sandiegonensis), and the vernal pool 

tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in 

conjunction with surveys throughout 

California for the purpose of enhancing 

their survival. 

Permit No.: TE–092469

Applicant: Ingrid Chlup, Santa Ana, 

California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (capture and collect and sacrifice) 

the Conservancy fairy shrimp 

(Branchinecta conservatio), the 

longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 

longiantenna), the Riverside fairy 

shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni), the 

San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta 

sandiegonensis), and the vernal pool 

tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in 

conjunction with surveys in southern 

California for the purpose of enhancing 

their survival. 

Permit No.: TE–093150

Applicant: Melissa Olson, Murrieta, 

California.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (survey by pursuit) the Quino 

checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha quino) in conjunction with 

surveys throughout the range of the 

species in California for the purpose of 

enhancing its survival. 

Permit No.: TE–093149

Applicant: Dean Blinn, Flagstaff, 

Arizona.

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (collect) the Amargosa pupfish 

(Cyprinodon nevadensis) in conjunction 

with research in Nye County, Nevada, 

for the purpose of enhancing its 

survival. 

Permit No.: TE–080774

Applicant: U.S. Mendocino National 

Forest, Arcata, California.

The permittee requests an amendment 

to take (collect tissue, use video cameras 

in burrows, and excavate burrows to 

locate dead beavers) the Point Arena 

Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa 

nigra) in conjunction with scientific 

research in Mendocino County, 

California, for the purpose of enhancing 

its survival. 

We solicit public review and 

comment on each of these recovery 

permit applications.

Dated: September 15, 2004. 

John Engbring, 

Acting Manager, California/Nevada 

Operations Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

[FR Doc. 04–21823 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Document for Issuance 

of an Incidental Take Permit 

Associated With a Habitat 

Conservation Plan at the Fort Ord 

Military Installation, Monterey County, 

CA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 

U.S.C. 4321, et seq.), the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service) advises the 

public that we intend to perform a 

scoping process to gather information 

necessary to help develop a NEPA 

document and determine whether to 

prepare an Environmental Assessment 

(EA) or an Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) on the proposed Habitat 

Conservation Plan (HCP) for the former 

Fort Ord Federal military installation in 

Monterey County, California. The 

decision to prepare an EIS or EA is, in 

part, contingent upon the complexity of 

issues identified during and following 

the scoping phase of the NEPA process. 

The proposed Fort Ord HCP is being 

prepared in compliance with the 

Federal Endangered Species Act of 

1973, as amended (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 

et seq.). 

The HCP is meant to support the 

issuance of incidental take permits to 

the Fort Ord Reuse Authority (FORA), 

State Parks, University of California at 

Santa Cruz, California State University 

at Monterey Bay, and the County of 

Monterey (the Applicants) from the 

Service under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 

ESA and from the California Department 

of Fish and Game (CDFG) under section 

2081 of the California Fish and Game 

Code in compliance with the California 

Endangered Species Act (CESA). 

We provide this notice to: 

(1) Advise other Federal and State 

agencies, affected tribes, and the public 

of our intent to prepare an EA or an EIS; 

(2) Announce the initiation of a 30-

day public scoping period; and 

(3) Obtain suggestions and 

information on the scope of issues and 

alternatives to be considered in the 

scoping process.

DATES: Public scoping meetings will be 

held on: Wednesday, October 13, 2004, 

from 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. and 7 p.m. 

to 9 p.m. Written comments should be 

received on or before October 29, 2004.

ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be 

held in the FORA Conference Facility/

Bridge Center, 13th Street, Building 

2925, Marina, CA 93933. Information, 

written comments, or questions related 

to the preparation of the EA or EIS and 

the NEPA process should be submitted 

to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 

Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, 

California 93003; or FAX (805) 644–

1766.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Diane Steeck at the above Ventura 

address, or at (805) 644–1766.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

58182 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 

Reasonable Accommodation 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations in order to attend and 

participate in the public meeting should 

contact Marilyn Bishop of the Ventura 

Fish and Wildlife Office at 805–644–

1766 as soon as possible. In order to 

allow sufficient time to process 

requests, please call no later than 1 

week before the public meeting. 

Information regarding this proposed 

action is available in alternative formats 

upon request. 

Background 

The Former Fort Ord 

The former Fort Ord military 

installation spans 28,000 acres near the 

cities of Seaside, Sand City, Monterey, 

Del Rey Oaks and Marina in Monterey 

County, California. Fort Ord was 

established in 1917 as a training for 

infantry troops. It was expanded for use 

as a maneuver and training ground for 

field artillery and cavalry troops 

stationed at the Presidio of Monterey. 

The 1991 Defense Base Realignment and 

Closure Commission recommended that 

Fort Ord be closed. The base was closed 

in September 1994. 

Closure, disposal and reuse of former 

Fort Ord required consultation between 

the U.S. Department of the Army (Army) 

and the Service under section 7 of the 

ESA because the Army’s actions 

potentially affected several species 

listed as threatened or endangered or 

proposed for listing under the ESA. As 

a result of that consultation, the Service 

issued a biological opinion on October 

19, 1993, and subsequent biological and 

conference opinions in 1997, 1999, and 

2002, finding that no jeopardy to 

federally listed plant and animal species 

or plants and animals proposed for 

listing would result from the Army’s 

actions. A key provision of the Army’s 

project description was the 

development and implementation of a 

habitat management plan (HMP) to 

minimize incidental take of listed 

species and their habitat and to mitigate 

for impacts to vegetation and wildlife 

resources resulting from the Army’s 

actions. In the 1993 biological opinion, 

the Service also recommended that the 

Army’s HMP consider all proposed and 

candidate species for Federal listing and 

other special-status species. 

In response to this requirement, the 

Army developed the HMP with input 

from Federal, State, and local agencies 

and organizations concerned with the 

natural resources and reuse of Fort Ord. 

The Service, the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), CDFG, the 

California Department of Parks and 

Recreation (State Parks), the University 

of California (UC), the Fort Ord Reuse 

Authority (FORA) and other members of 

the local Monterey Bay area community 

were all active participants in the 

development of the HMP. The HMP 

thus describes a cooperative Federal, 

State, and local conservation program 

for plant and animal species and 

habitats of concern known to occur at 

Fort Ord. 

The HMP’s conservation program 

establishes land use categories and 

habitat management requirements for all 

lands on the former base. Developable 

lands and habitats reserve areas are 

defined along with habitat corridors and 

restricted development areas. Resources 

conservation and management 

requirements are described and 

responsible parties for each designated 

habitat area on the former base are 

identified. 

While the conservation program 

established by the HMP is intended to 

be a comprehensive program for the 

former base, it stems form an agreement 

between the Army and the Service and 

does not exempt other landowners 

(existing or future) of transferred 

property from ESA section 9 

prohibitions against take of listed 

species or from compliance with the 

provisions of CESA. Under the ESA, the 

following activities are defined as take: 

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture or collect 

listed animal species, or attempt to 

engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 

1538). However, the HMP was also 

produced with the intent of benefiting 

all parties involved in the reuse of the 

former base by establishing a basis for 

regulatory compliance for other 

landowners of transferred property. The 

HMP was intended to serve as the basis 

for the proposed HCP and to support the 

possible issuance of incidental take 

permits under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 

ESA to non-Federal land recipients.

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) 

The Service has recommended that all 

non-Federal entities acquiring lands at 

the former Fort Ord apply for section 

10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits for 

all species covered in the HMP (Covered 

Species). In addition, CDFG requires 

non-Federal entities to obtain incidental 

take permits pursuant to section 2081 of 

the California Fish and Game Code if 

State-listed species will be taken. Seven 

animal species that are either listed, 

candidates, or designated species of 

concern are proposed Covered Species 

under the HCP, including: Smith’s blue 

butterfly (Euphilotes enoptes smithi), 

California linderiella (Linderiella 

occidentalis), California red-legged frog 

(Rana aurora draytoni), California tiger 

salamander (Ambystoma californiense), 

California black legless lizard (Anniella 

pulchra nigra), Western snowy plover 

(Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus), and 

Monterey ornate shrew (Sorex ornatus 

salarius). Eleven plant species that are 

either listed, candidate, or species of 

concern are also proposed Covered 

Species under the HCP, including: Sand 

gilia (Gilia tenuiflora ssp. arenaria), 

Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe 

pungens var. pungens), Robust 

spineflower (Chorizanthe robusta var. 

robusta), Seaside bird’s-beak 

(Cordylanthus rigidus var. littoralis), 

Toro manzanita (Arctostaphylos 

montereyensis), Sandmat manzanita 

(Arctrostaphylos pumila), Monterey 

ceanothus (Ceanothus cuneatus var. 

rigidus), Eastwood’s ericameria 

(Ericameria fasciculate), Coast 

wallflower (Erysimum ammophilum), 

Yadon’s piperia (Piperia yadoni), and 

Hooker’s manzanita (Arctostaphylos 

hookeri). To apply for such permits, 

applicants must submit a conservation 

plan along with their applications. The 

HCP, integrating key components of the 

HMP with additional elements required 

of an HCP (pursuant to 50 CFR 17.22(b)) 

is being prepared to provide a standalone HCP that is satisfactory to the 

Service and CDFG. 

Incidental take of Covered Species is 

proposed to occur as the former base is 

redeveloped consistent with the HCP. 

The proposed activities covered in the 

draft HCP include rehabilitation and 

construction of roads, utilities and other 

infrastructure to support new research/

educational, residential, commercial, 

light industrial, recreational and other 

development, generating approximately 

18,000 jobs. Management activities on 

non-federal lands such as weed control, 

fencing, and burning will also be 

included as proposed covered activities 

in the HCP. About 12,000 housing units 

are anticipated to be constructed on the 

former base supporting a population of 

about 37,000 people. To accommodate 

this growth and development, up to 

6,000 acres of existing habitat on the 

former base will be removed. However, 

the base-wide program for habitat 

preservation and management of 

approximately 17,600 acres of lands on 

former Fort Ord is intended to minimize 

and fully mitigate losses to Covered 

Species and their habitats that would 

result from base redevelopment. The 

requested permit term is 50 years. 

NEPA Document

The EA or EIS will consider the 

proposed action, the issuance of a 

section 10(a)(1)(B) permit under the Act, 

and a reasonable range of alternatives. A 

detailed description of the impacts of 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 29, 2004 / Notices 58183

the proposed action and each alternative 

will be included in the EA or EIS. 

Several alternatives, including a No 

Action Alternative, will be considered 

and analyzed, representing varying 

levels of conservation, impacts, and 

permit area configurations. The No 

Action alternative means that the 

Service would not issue a section 

10(a)(1)(B) permit. 

The EA or EIS will identify 

potentially significant direct, indirect, 

and cumulative impacts on biological 

resources, land use, air quality, water 

quality, water resources, economics, and 

other environmental issues that could 

occur with the implementation of the 

Service’s proposed actions and 

alternatives. For all potentially 

significant impacts, the EA or EIS will 

identify avoidance, minimization, and 

mitigation measures to reduce these 

impacts where feasible, to a level below 

significance. Where possible, we intend 

to incorporate by reference applicable 

sections from existing documents, such 

as the Army’s 1993 EIS and 1996 

Supplemental EIS on Fort Ord disposal 

and reuse. 

Review of this project will be 

conducted in accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.), NEPA regulations (40 CFR parts 

1500–1508) found at (http://

www.legal.gsa.gov), other appropriate 

Federal laws, and Service policies and 

procedures for compliance with those 

regulations. This notice is being 

furnished in accordance with 40 CFR 

1501.7 of NEPA to obtain suggestions 

and information from other agencies 

and the public on the scope of issues 

and alternatives to be addressed in the 

EA or EIS. The primary purpose of the 

scoping process is to identify important 

issues raised by the public, related to 

the proposed action. Written comments 

from interested parties are welcome to 

ensure that the full range of issues 

related to the permit request is 

identified. Written comments are 

encouraged, and we will accept written 

comments at the public meetings. In 

addition, you may submit written 

comments by mail or facsimile 

transmission (see ADDRESSES). All 

comments received, including names 

and addresses, will become part of the 

official administrative record and may 

be made available to the public.

Dated: September 21, 2004. 

Ron Cole, 

Deputy Manager, California/Nevada 

Operations Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service.

[FR Doc. 04–21813 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Issuance of Permits

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of issuance of permits for 

marine mammals. 

SUMMARY: The following permits were 

issued.

ADDRESSES: Documents and other 

information submitted with these 

applications are available for review, 

subject to the requirements of the 

Privacy Act and Freedom of Information 

Act, by any party who submits a written 

request for a copy of such documents to: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division 

of Management Authority, 4401 North 

Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, 

Virginia 22203; fax (703) 358–2281.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Division of Management Authority, 

telephone (703) 358–2104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that on the dates below, as 

authorized by the provisions of the 

Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 

as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361, et seq.), the 

Fish and Wildlife Service issued the 

requested permit(s) subject to certain 

conditions set forth therein. 

Marine Mammals

Permit 

number Applicant Receipt of application Federal Registernotice 

Permit issuance

date 

086649 ..... Philip A. Teel ............................................. 69 FR 30715; May 28, 2004 ..................... August 5, 2004 

089464 ..... Randy C. Brooks ....................................... 69 FR 40965; July 7, 2004 ....................... September 7, 2004 

Dated: September 17, 2004. 

Monica Farris, 

Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, 

Division of Management Authority.

[FR Doc. 04–21783 Filed 9–28–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service 

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force 

Gulf of Mexico Regional Panel Meeting

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Aquatic Nuisance 

Species (ANS) Task Force Gulf of 

Mexico Regional Panel. The meeting 

topics are identified in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

DATES: The Gulf of Mexico Regional 

Panel will meet from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. 

on Monday, November 8, 2004, 8:30 

a.m. to 5 p.m. on Tuesday, November 9, 

2004, and 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. on 

Wednesday, November 10, 2004. 

Minutes of the meeting will be available 

for public inspection during regular 

business hours, Monday through Friday.

ADDRESSES: The Gulf of Mexico 

Regional Panel meeting will be held at 

the Palace Resort and Hotel, 158 

Howard Avenue, Biloxi, MS 39530. 

Phone 228–432–8888. Minutes of the 

meeting will be maintained in the office 

of Chief, Division of Environmental 

Quality, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Suite 322, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, 

Arlington, Virginia 22203–1622.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

Lukens, Gulf of Mexico Panel Chair, 

Assistant Director, Gulf States Marine 

Fisheries Commission, PO Box 726, 

Ocean Springs, MS 39566, 228–875–

5912, or Everett Wilson, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service at 703–358–2148.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 

I), this notice announces meetings of the 

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force 

Gulf of Mexico Regional Panel. The 

Task Force was established by the 

Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance 

Prevention and Control Act of 1990. The 

Gulf of Mexico Regional Panel was 

established by the ANS Task Force in 

1999 and is comprised of 

representatives from Federal, State, and 

local agencies and from private 

environmental and commercial 

interests. 

The purpose of the Panel is to advise 

and make recommendations to the 

Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force on 

issues relating to the Gulf of Mexico 

region of the United States that 

includes: Alabama, Florida, Louisiana,