30320 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2011 / Notices 

and alternatives and to solicit input and 

feedback from the public on issues to be 

addressed in the PEIS. Meetings will be 

announced in local media. The public 

will also be invited to review and 

comment on the Draft PEIS when it is 

released. Comments from the public 

will be considered before any decision 

is made regarding implementing the 

proposed action. 

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12914 Filed 5–24–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Public Scoping Meeting and 

Preparation of Environmental Impact 

Statement for Luce Bayou Interbasin 

Transfer Project in Liberty County and 

Harris County, TX 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Galveston District, has 

received a permit application for a 

Department of the Army Permit 

pursuant to Section 10 of the Rivers and 

Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) and 

Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 

U.S.C. 1344) from the Coastal Water 

Authority (SWG–2009–00188) for the 

proposed Coastal Water Authority’s 

Luce Bayou Interbasin Transfer Project 

located in eastern Liberty County with 

the 26.5-mile corridor extending 

southwestward from the Trinity River to 

a discharge point near the confluence of 

Luce Bayou with Lake Houston. The 

primary Federal involvement associated 

with the proposed action is the 

discharge or dredged or fill material into 

waters of the United States, including 

jurisdictional wetlands, and the 

construction of structures that may 

affect navigable waters. Federal 

authorizations for the proposed project 

would constitute a ‘‘major federal 

action.’’ Based on the potential impacts, 

both individually and cumulatively, the 

Corps intends to prepare an 

Environmental Statement (EIS) in 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act to render a 

final decision on the permit 

applications. 

The Corps’ decision will be to either 

issue, issue with modification or deny 

Department of the Army permits for the 

proposed action. The EIS will assess the 

potential social, economic and 

environmental impacts of the 

construction and operation of the 

interbasin conveyance, associated 

facilities, and appurtenances and is 

intended to be sufficient in scope to 

address Federal, State and local 

requirements, environmental issues 

concerning the proposed action, and 

permit reviews. 

DATES: The scoping period will 

commence with the publication of this 

notice. The formal scoping period will 

end 60 days after the publication of this 

notice. Comments regarding issues 

relative to the proposed project should 

be received. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: Mail: 

Jayson M. Hudson, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Regulatory Branch, P.O. Box 

1229, Galveston, TX 77553–1229; Fax: 

(409) 766–3931 or E-mail: 

Jayson.m.hudson@usace.army.mil. 

Emailed comments, including 

attachments, should be provided in 

.doc, .docx, .pdf or .txt formats. 

Documents pertinent to the proposed 

project may be examined at http:// 

www.swg.usace.army.mil/reg/eis.asp. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jayson Hudson, (409) 766–3108. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Galveston District intends to prepare a 

DEIS on the proposed Luce Bayou 

Interbasin Transfer Project which is the 

proposed transfer of water from the 

Trinity River in Liberty County to Lake 

Houston in Harris County, TX. The 

Coastal Water Authority proposed this 

project and is the applicant for the 

Department of the Army permit (DA) 

SWG–2009–00188. 

1. Project Background: The Coastal 

Water Authority is proposing to convey 

up to 400 million gallons of water per 

day (MGD) under gravity in accordance 

with the City of Houston’s existing 

water rights permit from the Trinity 

River to Lake Houston, a distance of 

approximately 26.5 miles. The Trinity 

River water would be conveyed from the 

proposed pump station through large 

diameter pipelines to a sediment storage 

and settling basin and then through an 

earthen canal to outfall at the Lake 

Houston discharge point. The canal 

would have side berms and there would 

be an access road, drainage ditches, and 

perimeter fencing surrounding the water 

conveyance canal. The proposed project 

consists of the following: 

a. A new water pumping station will 

be constructed on the Trinity River at 

Capers Ridge approximately 10 miles 

north of Dayton, TX. 

b. Dual, 108-inch diameter force 

mains will be constructed extending 

from the Capers Ridge pump station 

approximately 3.5 miles to the west and 

southwest to outfall to the 

sedimentation settling basin. 

c. An approximate 20-acre 

sedimentation settling and storage 

basin. 

d. An approximate 23.5 mile claylined earthen canal with 4:1 side slopes 

within a 300-foot easement that would 

include access roads, berms, chain link 

perimeter fencing, flow control 

structures, and metering stations. 

e. Box culverts at canal and roadway 

crossings and multiple bawl-ground 

siphons constructed to facilitate wildlife 

movement and maintain existing 

hydrology along the canal conveyance 

system. 

f. An approximate 10-acre 

maintenance facility located 

approximately 6 miles north of Dayton, 

TX. 

g. Discharge structure along the 

southeastern shoreline of Lake Houston. 

2. Scoping and Public Involvement 

Process: A Public Notice was published 

on April 19, 2010 to initiate the public 

scoping process for the proposed 

project. At that time, based on 

information provided by the Applicant, 

a preliminary review indicated that an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

was not required. However, based on 

continuing permit assessment and 

information brought forth during the 

initial coordination process, areas of 

potential significant impact on the 

human environment have been 

identified. Therefore, the EIS process is 

being implemented so that the permit 

application can be fully evaluated and 

a permit decision can be made. All 

comments received to date, including 

those provided for review during the 

initial scoping process, will be 

considered by the Galveston District 

during EIS preparation. The purpose of 

the EIS scoping meeting is to gather 

information on the subjects to be 

studied in detail by the EIS. 

3. Purpose and Need. The basic 

purpose of the proposed action is to 

provide drinking water for the City of 

Houston and surrounding area. The 

overall purpose is to provide drinking 

water utilizing water rights currently 

held by the City of Houston in the 

Trinity River. The Corps recognizes that 

there is a public and private need for 

drinking water. 

4. Alternatives. An evaluation of 

alternatives to the Applicant’s preferred 

alternative initially being considered 

includes a No Action alternative, 

alternatives that would avoid, minimize 

and compensate for impacts to the 

aquatic environment within the project 

right-of-way, alternatives that would 

avoid, minimize and compensate for 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 25, 2011 / Notices 30321 

impacts to the aquatic environment 

outside of the right-of-way, alternatives 

utilizing alternative practices, and other 

reasonable alternatives that will be 

developed through the project scoping 

process which may also meet the 

identified purpose and need. 

5. Public Involvement. The purpose of 

the public scoping process is to 

determine relevant issues that will 

influence the scope of the 

environmental analysis and EIS 

alternatives. General concerns in the 

following categories have been 

identified to date: potential direct 

effects to waters of the United States 

including wetlands; water quality; 

aquatic species; air quality; 

environmental justice; socioeconomic 

environment; archaeological and 

cultural resources; recreation and 

recreational resources; energy supply 

and natural resources; hazardous waste 

and materials; aesthetics; public health 

and safety; navigation; erosion and 

accretion; invasive species; cumulative 

impacts; public benefit and needs of the 

people along with potential effects on 

the human environment. All parties 

who express interest will be given an 

opportunity to participate in the 

process. 

6. Coordination. The proposed action 

is being coordinated with a number of 

Federal, State, regional and local 

agencies including but not limited to the 

Environmental Protection Agency, the 

United States (U.S.) Fish and Wildlife 

Service, U.S. National Marine Fisheries 

Service, the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality, the Texas 

General Land Office, and the Texas 

Parks and Wildlife Department. Other 

agencies, including the Trinity River 

National Wildlife Refuge, Texas Water 

Development Board, and the Texas 

Department of Transportation, may also 

comment during the scoping process. 

7. Availability of the Draft EIS. The 

Corps currently expects the Draft EIS to 

be made available to the public by 

December 2011. A public scoping 

meeting will be held at the Dayton 

Community Center in Dayton, Texas. 

The Corps will announce the public 

scoping meeting through local news 

media and the Corps’ webpage at http://

www.swg.usace.army.mil/reg at least 15 

days prior to the first meeting. 

Brenda S. Bowen, 

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2011–12912 Filed 5–24–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Withdrawal of Notice of Intent To 

Prepare a Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery 

Project, Virginia & Maryland 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps), Baltimore and 

Norfolk Districts published a notice of 

intent (NOI) (74 FR 47927) for the 

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, MD 

and VA study on September 18, 2009. 

That NOI announced that the Corps 

Baltimore and Norfolk Districts would 

prepare a single, integrated Native 

Oyster Restoration Master Plan (master 

plan) and programmatic environmental 

impact statement (PEIS) for native 

oyster recovery in the entire Chesapeake 

Bay (inclusive of both Maryland and 

Virginia) and that the document would 

be tiered to the Programmatic EIS for 

Oyster Restoration in Chesapeake Bay 

Including the Use of a Native and/or 

Nonnative Oyster. In August 2009, the 

record of decision for Oyster Restoration 

in Chesapeake Bay including the Use of 

a Native and/or Non-Native Species was 

signed. The preferred alternative 

identified in the 2009 PEIS recommends 

‘‘using a combination of alternatives that 

involves only the native Eastern oyster 

(Crassostrea virginica).’’ Consistent with 

the preferred alternative, the Corps will 

expand upon and further develop plans 

and recommendations for Chesapeake 

Bay native oyster restoration in the 

master plan. However since the master 

plan will not be identifying site-specific 

construction areas for restoration and 

the larger issue of oyster restoration 

Bay-wide, has been reviewed, a PEIS for 

the master plan is no longer warranted. 

Therefore, the Corps is withdrawing its 

NOI to prepare a PEIS. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Susan Conner, Norfolk District U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: 

CENAO–PM–PA, 803 Front Street, 

Norfolk, VA 23510. E-mail address: 

Susan.L.Conner@usace.army.mil and 

phone number: 757–201–7390 or Ms. 

Anna Compton, Baltimore District, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, Attn: 

CENAB–PL–P, P.O, Box 1715, 

Baltimore, MD 21203. E-mail address: 

Anna.M.Compton@usace.army.mil and 

phone number 410–962–4633. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. The Baltimore District previously 

published a NOI (69 FR 68887) for the 

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, MD 

and VA study on November 26, 2004. 

That NOI indicated that the Baltimore 

District would prepare a draft EIS for 

native oyster (Crassostrea virginica) 

recovery activities within Maryland 

waters of the Chesapeake Bay. A second 

NOI (71 FR 14857) was published for 

the Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, 

MD and VA study on March 24, 2006. 

That NOI announced that the Corps 

Baltimore and Norfolk Districts would 

prepare a single, integrated master plan 

and PEIS for native oyster recovery in 

the entire Chesapeake Bay. 

2. A third NOI was published on 

September 18, 2009 (74 FR 47927) to 

announce that the timing of the master 

plan/PEIS was delayed so that the 

document could be tiered to the 

Programmatic EIS for Oyster Restoration 

in Chesapeake Bay Including the Use of 

a Native and/or Nonnative Oyster. In 

August 2009 the record of decision for 

Oyster Restoration in Chesapeake Bay 

including the Use of a Native and/or 

Non-Native Species was signed. The 

preferred alternative identified in the 

PEIS recommends ‘‘using a combination 

of alternatives that involves only the 

native Eastern oyster (Crassostrea 

virginica).’’ Consistent with the 

preferred alternative, the Corps will 

expand upon and further develop plans 

and recommendations for Chesapeake 

Bay native oyster restoration in the 

master plan. The master plan will not 

identify individual, site specific, 

construction projects. The master plan, 

instead, will develop a comprehensive 

approach to oyster restoration and will 

lay out a road map for a long-term, 

large-scale restoration of native oysters 

in the entire Chesapeake Bay. For each 

area identified for restoration and when 

Corps appropriations are received, 

necessary National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) documents will be 

prepared to specifically describe the 

scope, scale, and details of construction 

of site specific oyster projects. Therefore 

the Programmatic EIS for Oyster 

Restoration in Chesapeake Bay 

Including the Use of a Native and/or 

Nonnative Oyster prepared in August 

2009 is sufficient and appropriate to 

support the plans laid out in the master 

plan precluding the need for another 

PEIS. The master plan will incorporate 

science, policy, and experience from a 

number of sources to develop a 

comprehensive approach to oyster 

restoration in Maryland and Virginia. 

All suitable locations and techniques 

available for native oyster restoration 

will be identified and explored, and, if 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES