[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 51 (Friday, March 16, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12593-12595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-1286]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Pike and San Isabel National Forest Cimarron and Comanche 
Grasslands, Colorado; Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District 
Reservoir Analysis

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

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

SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service (FS) and the Upper Arkansas Water 
Conservacy District (UAWCD) have agreed to work cooperatively for the 
creation of the necessary environmental analysis and associated 
documents for the purpose of potential expansion construction of the 
North Fork Reservoir Water storage facility, reconstruction of the Boss 
Lake Reservoir emergency spillway, and long term operations and 
maintenance of all three reservoirs operated by UAWCD (Boss Lake, 
O'Haver, and North Fork). The FS has determined that all three 
facilities should be analyzed under an ``all-inclusive'' Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) which addresses each facility individually.
    The UAWCD has agreed to pay for all necessary NEPA analysis through 
a third party consultant working for the FS. The FS will oversee the 
final approval of:
    1. The environmental firm awarded the contract to conduct the NEPA 
analysis.
    2. The quality/thoroughness of the final environmental document.
    3. Any future long-term Special Use Permit (naming UAWCD as the 
holder) covering the operational hydrology and maintenance needs of 
each individual water storage facility.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be postmarked 
or received within 45 days from the date of publication of this notice 
in the Federal Register to ensure full consideration. The draft 
environmental impact statement is expected January 2008 and the final 
environmental impact statement is expected April 2008.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to; USDA Forest Service, Salida Ranger 
District, ATTN: Mike Sugaski, 325 W. Rainbow Blvd., Salida, CO 81201.

[[Page 12594]]

    Comments may be submitted electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#503d25233731233b391036237e3635347e2523"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="573a22243036243c3e17312479313233792224">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Comments may also be sent by fax to (719) 539-3593.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Mike Sugaski, Recreation Staff, 
Salida Ranger District at the address noted above or by calling (719) 
539-3591.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Purpose and Need for Action

    The UAWCD has determined that there is a need to operate all three 
reservoirs to meet the user demands and a growing population. Also 
driving this project's Purpose and Need is the fact that each 
facility's term Special Use Permit (SUP) has expired. The FS feels that 
a thorough understanding of each facility's associated watershed and 
operational hydrology must be reached before term SUPs can be reissued 
to UAWCD. The Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM) will be used 
to assist in determining appropriate discharge volumes and flow regimes 
necessary for protection of terrestrial and aquatic life and maintain 
stream channel stability below each reservoir.

Proposed Action

    UAWCD proposes to operate all three reservoirs to meet future water 
demands. They intend to analyze the feasibility of increasing the 
capacity of North Fork Reservoir and reconstructing the Boss Lake 
Reservoir emergency spillway, as well as assess the long term operation 
and maintenance requirements and future operational hydrology scenarios 
for all three reservoirs. The proposed expansion being analyzed for 
North Fork Reservoir could double the live storage capacity from 516 
acre feed to 1024 acre feet, which would increase the surface acreage 
of the lake from 33 acres to 42 acres. To accommodate the additional 
storage, the dam height would be raised 15 feet.
    The FS proposes that all three water storage facilities be analyzed 
under an ``all-inclusive'' Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which 
addresses each facility individually.

Possible Alternatives

    Other than the ``Proposed Action'' brought forward by UAWCD, and 
the ``No Action'' alternative, additional alternatives to this proposed 
project have not been identified at this time. Potential alternatives 
to the proposed action will undoubtedly surface during the internal and 
external scoping and public comment periods required during the NEPA 
process.

Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The USDA Forest Service will be the lead agency for this project, 
but will consult with other concerned local, state, and federal 
entities as appropriate. For example, Section 7 consultation with the 
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service will be completed for the analysis area 
for Threatened and Endangered Species (TES).

Responsible Official

    The responsible official is Robert J. Leaverton, PSICC Forest 
Supervisor, 2840 Kachina Drive, Pueblo, CO 81008.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The responsible official will decide whether or not to allow for 
expansion of North Fork Reservoir, allow the reconstruction of the Boss 
Lake Reservoir emergency spillway, and approve the long term operation 
and maintenance requirements and future operational hydrology scenarios 
for all three reservoirs. The decision and rationale for the decision 
will be documented in the Record of Decision, which will be subject to 
Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 CFR part 215).

Scoping Process

    Internal FS scoping has already begun in the form of posting the 
project within the Schedule of Proposed Actions (SOPA), 
Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) meetings, conference calls, and FS 
specialist field reviews of various sites within the analysis area. 
External public scoping was initiated by way of listing the project 
within SOPA, posting a legal public notice in the Salida District's 
local newspaper, the Mountain Mail, on August 25, 2004, as well as 
radio announcements by the local Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW).
    In addition to these preliminary forms of scoping, the FS plans on 
holding public meetings throughout various stages of this project to 
ensure that all relevant issues and concerns are brought to the 
attention of the agency before issuing the final decision. The times 
and locations of these meetings are yet to be determined.

Preliminary Issues

    Some preliminary issues identified for this project include the 
following:
    1. Expired long-term SUP's for all three facilities.
    2. Appropriate discharge volumes needed to protect terrestrial and 
aquatic life and maintain stream channel stability below each reservoir 
while meeting UAWCD water rights and user demands.
    3. Effects to the high-use scenic campground at North Fork and Boss 
Lake.
    4. Unrestricted public access to each facility.
    5. Effects to private landowners adjacent to North Fork and Boss 
Lake.
    6. Impacts to sub-alpine wetland areas at North Fork, and effects 
to two rare plant species identified near the North Fork facility 
(moonwort, Botrychium spp).

Permits or Licenses Required

    Each facility's term Special Use Permit (SUP) has expired. The FS 
feels that a thorough understanding of each facility's associated 
watershed and operational hydrology must be reached before term SUPs 
can be reissued to UAWCD. Temporary Special Use Permits have been 
issued to UAWCD to allow for the continued operation of the existing 
water storage facilities.
    An Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit has been obtained by UAWCD in 
order to implement work that may be necessary within or adjacent to 
designated wetland areas around the North Fork facility. Additional 404 
permits may be necessary at Boss Lake and North Fork prior to 
implementing any selected alternative.

Comment Requested

    This Notice of Intent supports the scoping process which guides the 
development of the environmental impact statement.

Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent 
Environmental Review

    A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for public 
comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement 
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency 
publishes the notice of availability in the local newspaper. The Forest 
Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give 
reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public 
participation in the environmental review process.
    First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must 
structure their participation in the environmental review of the 
proposal so that it is meaningful and alerts an agency to the 
reviewer's position and contentions (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. 
v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,553 (1978)). Also, environmental objections that 
could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage, but 
are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact

[[Page 12595]]

statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts (City of Angoon v. 
Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, 
Inc. v. Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980)).
    Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those 
interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the 45-
day comment period so that substantive comments and objections are made 
available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully 
consider them and respond to them in the final environmental impact 
statement.
    To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues 
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft 
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is 
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the 
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft 
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives 
formulated and discussed in the statement.
    Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality 
Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National 
Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. 
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who 
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal 
and will be available for public inspection.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 
1909.15, Section 21)

    Dated: March 12, 2007.
Robert J. Leaverton,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 07-1286 Filed 3-15-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-ES-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>