Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 23741 

Location 

The project site is located at Sears 

Point, near the intersection of LakevilleReclamation Road and State Route 37 

(SR 37) in southern Sonoma County, 

California. The site is also traversed 

from east to west by a rail line owned 

by the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit 

(SMART) District. 

The project site is a total of 2,327 ac 

owned by the Sonoma Land Trust (SLT) 

and is comprised of two large 

properties, the North Point Joint 

Venture (NPJV) parcel and the Dickson 

Ranch parcel, which are situated on the 

edge of San Pablo Bay between the 

mouth of the Petaluma River and Tolay 

Creek. The 1,679-ac NPJV parcel 

extends both north and south of SR 37. 

The parcel is bounded on the north by 

the Infineon Raceway property, on the 

east by Cougar Mountain (north of SR 

37) and Paradise Vineyards (south of SR 

37), on the south by the SMART rail 

line, and on the west by LakevilleReclamation Road. The 648-ac Dickson 

Ranch parcel is located entirely south of 

Highway 37, and is bounded on the 

south by San Pablo Bay and on the west 

by Tolay Creek and the outboard levee 

as it veers bayward from the SMART 

rail line. The entire Dickson Ranch 

parcel and 858 ac of the NPJV parcel are 

located within the approved acquisition 

boundary of the Service’s San Pablo Bay 

National Wildlife Refuge. The SLT is 

transferring approximately 500-ac of the 

land bounded by Highway 37 and the 

SMART rail line to the Service, and the 

remainder of the land to CDFG. 

Alternatives 

We identified and analyzed a total of 

eight alternatives. The alternatives were 

analyzed based on a set of criteria, 

including (1) ability to meet the project 

purpose and need; (2) technical, 

logistical, and financial feasibility; and 

(3) ability to avoid or substantially 

reduce one or more significant impacts. 

We removed five of these alternatives 

from further consideration because they 

did not meet the purpose and need, 

were not feasible, or did not provide 

substantial variation in environmental 

impacts. The lead agencies carried 

forward three possible alternatives for 

environmental analysis: The No-Action 

Alternative, the Partial-Tidal (Preferred) 

Restoration Alternative, and the FullTidal Restoration Alternative. 

No-Action Alternative 

Under the No-Action Alternative, 

there would be no wetland restoration 

or enhancement, no new trails, and no 

new habitat creation, with the exception 

of the California red-legged frog 

enhancement, which would likely 

proceed as a separate enhancement 

project. The Sonoma Land Trust (SLT) 

would maintain ownership of the 

property north of Highway 37, and 

would still move forward with the 

transfer of title of the Sears Point 

properties south of Highway 37 to the 

Federal and State agencies. SLT will 

honor existing agricultural and 

commercial leases on the property 

through May 2012. 

Partial-Tidal (Proposed) Restoration 

Alternative 

The Partial-Tidal Restoration 

Alternative would restore 955 acres of 

tidal marsh; preserve and enhance a 

106-acre area of non-tidal seasonal 

wetland while maintaining agriculture 

between the SMART line and Highway 

37; provide public recreation access 

south and possibly north of Highway 37; 

and enhance 15.5 acres of additional 

breeding habitat for the California redlegged frog, including 0.86 acres of 

excavation in the floodplain near the 

northern project boundary. 

Full-Tidal Restoration Alternative 

The Full-Tidal Restoration Alternative 

would restore 1,352 acres of tidal marsh; 

provide public recreation access south 

and possibly north of Highway 37; and 

enhance 15.5 acres of additional 

breeding habitat, including 0.86 acres of 

excavation in the floodplain, for the 

California red-legged frog near the 

northern project boundary. 

NEPA Compliance 

The entire Dickson Ranch parcel and 

858 acres of the NPJV parcel are located 

within the approved acquisition 

boundary of the San Pablo Bay NWR. 

Federally owned lands within the 

Refuge boundary are adjacent to these 

properties. In order to implement the 

action alternatives described above, 

some activity (levee breaching and 

habitat restoration) within the San Pablo 

Bay NWR is necessary. We will use the 

EIR/EIS to determine whether to 

authorize activities within the San Pablo 

Bay NWR in order to accomplish project 

goals. 

The EIR/EIS discusses the direct, 

indirect, and cumulative impacts of the 

alternatives on biological resources, 

cultural resources, land use, air quality, 

water quality, water resources, and 

other environmental resources. It also 

identifies appropriate mitigation 

measures for adverse environmental 

effects. 

Public Review 

We conducted public review of the 

EIR/EIS in accordance with the 

requirements of NEPA, as amended (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), its implementing 

regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), 

other applicable regulations, and our 

procedures for compliance with those 

regulations. The formal public comment 

period for the draft EIR/EIS opened on 

August 28, 2009, and closed on October 

13, 2009. We announced the availability 

of the draft document by several 

methods, including press releases and 

public notice, including a notice in the 

Federal Register (74 FR 44379, August 

28, 2009). While we received a number 

of comments on the draft EIR/EIS, none 

of the comments received from 

interested individuals, groups, or 

agencies required us or CDFG to add 

new alternatives or to significantly alter 

existing alternatives. 

The EIR/EIS meets the requirements 

of both NEPA and the California 

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The 

California Department of Fish and Game 

is the CEQA lead agency. The final EIR/ 

EIS contains our responses to all 

comments received on the draft 

document. Following the release of the 

final EIR/EIS, we will prepare a Record 

of Decision not sooner than 30 days 

after the Environmental Protection 

Agency has published its notice of filing 

of the document in the Federal Register. 

We anticipate that we will issue a 

Record of Decision in the spring of 

2012. 

We provide this notice under 

regulations implementing NEPA (40 

CFR 1506.6). 

Alexandra Pitts, 

Acting, Regional Director, Pacific Southwest 

Region. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9577 Filed 4–19–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R4–FHC–2012–N093; 

FVHC98130406900Y4–XXX–FF04G01000] 

DEEPWATER HORIZON Oil Spill; Final 

Phase I Early Restoration Plan and 

Environmental Assessment 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of final 

report. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Oil 

Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA), the Framework Agreement for 

Early Restoration Addressing Injuries 

Resulting from the DEEPWATER 

HORIZON Oil Spill (Framework 

Agreement), notice is hereby given that 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
23742 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 

the Federal and State natural resource 

trustee agencies (Trustees) have 

approved the Phase I Early Restoration 

Plan and Environmental Assessment 

(Phase I ERP/EA) describing the first 

eight restoration projects selected by the 

Trustees to commence the process of 

restoring natural resources and services 

injured or lost as a result of the 

DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill, which 

occurred on or about April 20, 2010, in 

the Gulf of Mexico. The purpose of this 

notice is to inform the public of the 

availability of the Phase I ERP/EA. 

ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You 

may download the Phase I ERP/EA and 

the Framework Agreement at http:// 

www.gulfspillrestoration.noaa.gov or 

http://www.doi.gov/deepwaterhorizon. 

Alternatively, you may request a CD of 

the document (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). You may also 

review hard copies of the Phase I ERP/ 

EA at any of the public repositories 

listed at http://www.doi.gov/ 

deepwaterhorizon. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Spears, at FW4DWHInfo@fws.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

On or about April 20, 2010, the 

mobile offshore drilling unit 

DEEPWATER HORIZON, which was 

being used to drill a well for BP 

Exploration and Production, Inc. (BP) in 

the Macondo prospect (Mississippi 

Canyon 252–MC252), experienced a 

significant explosion, fire and 

subsequent sinking in the Gulf of 

Mexico, resulting in discharges of oil 

and other substances from the rig and 

from the wellhead on the seabed. An 

estimated 4.9 million barrels (210 

million gallons) of oil were released 

from the well into the Gulf of Mexico 

over a period of approximately three 

months. In addition, approximately 

771,000 gallons of dispersants were 

applied to the waters of the spill area in 

an attempt to minimize impacts from 

spilled oil. Affected resources include 

ecologically, recreationally, and 

commercially important species and 

their habitats in the Gulf of Mexico and 

along the coastal areas of Alabama, 

Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 

Texas. 

Federal and State trustees (listed 

below) are conducting the natural 

resource damage assessment for the 

DEEPWATER HORIZON oil spill under 

the Oil Pollution Act 1990 (OPA; 33 

U.S.C. 2701 et seq.). 

The Trustees are: 

• U.S. Department of the Interior 

(DOI), as represented by the National 

Park Service, U.S Fish and Wildlife 

Service, and Bureau of Land 

Management; 

• National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), on behalf of 

the U.S Department of Commerce; 

• State of Louisiana Coastal 

Protection and Restoration Authority, 

Oil Spill Coordinator’s Office, 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, 

and Department of Natural Resources; 

• State of Mississippi Department of 

Environmental Quality; 

• State of Alabama Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources and 

Geological Survey of Alabama; 

• State of Florida Department of 

Environmental Protection and Fish and 

Wildlife Conservation Commission; and 

• Texas Parks and Wildlife 

Department, Texas General Land Office, 

and Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality. 

The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) 

is a Trustee, but does not have affected 

lands in this Phase I ERP/EA. 

Background 

On April 20, 2011, BP agreed to 

provide up to $1 billion toward early 

restoration projects in the Gulf of 

Mexico to address injuries to natural 

resources caused by the DEEPWATER 

HORIZON oil spill. The Framework 

Agreement provides a mechanism 

through which the Trustees and BP can 

work together ‘‘to commence 

implementation of early restoration 

projects that will provide meaningful 

benefits to accelerate restoration in the 

Gulf as quickly as practicable’’ prior to 

the completion of the natural resource 

damage assessment process or full 

resolution of the Trustees’ natural 

resource damages claim. 

As the first step in this accelerated 

process, the Trustees proposed a suite of 

eight early restoration projects in a 

Phase I Draft Early Restoration Plan and 

Environmental Assessment (DERP/EA) 

made public December 14, 2011. The 

public was afforded 60 days to review 

and comment on the DERP/EA (77 FR 

78016, December 15, 2011). During that 

review period, the Trustees also held 12 

public meetings in January and 

February 2012 in the 5 Gulf States and 

Washington, DC to facilitate public 

comment on that plan. 

The Trustees considered the public 

comments on the DERP/EA prior to 

finalizing selection of the Phase 1 Early 

Restoration projects. The public 

comments received and the Trustees’ 

responses are addressed in the Phase 1 

ERP/EA at Chapter 5. 

Overview of the Phase 1 ERP/EA 

Early Restoration Plan Alternatives, 

Including the Selected Alternative 

The ERP/EA describes two early 

restoration alternatives: No Action— 

Natural Recovery (required for 

consideration by OPA) and Selected 

Alternative—Phase I Early Restoration 

Projects. Under the No Action 

Alternative, the trustees would not 

implement early restoration projects as 

described in this ERP/EA. Rather, the 

trustees would rely, for the time being, 

solely on natural recovery processes to 

restore natural resources to their prespill conditions and would undertake 

no early actions to accelerate recovery 

or to help address interim resource 

losses. 

The Selected Alternative includes 

eight projects that meet the selection 

criteria as described in the Phase I ERP/ 

EA. 

Selected Early Restoration Alternative 

The Selected Alternative includes the 

following suite of early restoration 

projects: (1) Lake Hermitage Marsh 

Creation—NRDA Early Restoration 

Project; (2) Louisiana Oyster Cultch 

Project; (3) Mississippi Oyster Cultch 

Restoration; (4) Mississippi Artificial 

Reef Habitat; (5) Marsh Island 

(Portersville Bay) Marsh Creation; (6) 

Alabama Dune Restoration Cooperative 

Project; (7) Florida Boat Ramp 

Enhancement and Construction; (8) 

Florida (Pensacola Beach) Dune 

Restoration. Each of these projects is 

expected to benefit a natural resource or 

service injured by the DEEPWATER 

HORIZON oil spill. 

This Phase I ERP/EA represents the 

initial set of projects selected as part of 

the early restoration process. Planning 

for additional early restoration actions is 

continuing. Neither the Phase I ERP/EA 

nor any subsequent plan for early 

restoration is intended to or will fully 

address all injuries caused by the spill 

or provide the extent of restoration 

needed to satisfy claims against 

responsible parties. Further 

comprehensive restoration will still be 

required to fully compensate the public 

for natural resource losses from the oil 

spill. 

Administrative Record 

The documents comprising the 

Administrative Record can be viewed 

electronically at http://www.doi.gov/ 

deepwaterhorizon/adminrecord/ 

index.cfm. 

Author 

The primary author of this notice is 

Nanciann Regalado. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 77 / Friday, April 20, 2012 / Notices 23743 

Authorities 

The authorities of this action are the 

Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 U.S.C. 

2701 et seq.), the implementing Natural 

Resource Damage Assessment 

regulations found at 15 CFR Part 990, 

and the Framework Agreement. 

Dated: April 16, 2012. 

Cynthia K. Dohner, 

DOI Authorized Official. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9581 Filed 4–18–12; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R1–ES–2012–N081; 10120–1112– 

0000–F2] 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

and Proposed Amendment of the 

Washington Department of Natural 

Resources Habitat Conservation Plan 

for Forested State Trust Lands 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent; announcement 

of public scoping meetings; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), intend to 

conduct public scoping under the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) to gather information to prepare 

a Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) in anticipation of receiving an 

application for an Incidental Take 

Permit (ITP) amendment under section 

10 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) 

from the Washington Department of 

Natural Resources (WDNR) for their 

1997 Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) 

for forested State trust lands. The HCP 

amendment involves the proposed 

replacement of an interim conservation 

strategy for the threatened marbled 

murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), 

which is currently being implemented 

under the HCP, with a long-term 

conservation strategy. The proposed 

amendment to the HCP and the ITP is 

exclusively limited to consideration of a 

long-term conservation strategy for the 

marbled murrelet on HCP-covered 

lands. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments by May 21, 

2012 (see ADDRESSES section). 

Four public scoping meetings will be 

held to discuss the DEIS, and we will 

accept written comments at these 

meetings. These meetings will be held 

on the following dates and at the 

following locations: 

1. April 30, 2012, 6–8 p.m., WDNR, 

Natural Resource Building, 1st Floor, 

1111 Washington Street SE., Olympia, 

WA 98504. 

2. May 3, 2012, 6–8 p.m., WDNR, 

Northwest Region Office, 919 N. 

Township Street, Sedro Woolley, WA 

98284. 

3. May 8, 2012, 6–8 p.m., Wahkikum 

County Courthouse, Pacific Cascade/ 

River Room, 25 River Street, Cathlamet, 

WA 98612. 

4. May 9, 2012, 6–8 p.m., WDNR, 

Olympic Region Headquarters, 411 

Tillicum Lane, Forks, WA 98331. 

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning 

the preparation of the DEIS, proposed 

HCP amendment, and the NEPA process 

may be submitted by one of the 

following methods to WDNR. WDNR 

will transmit all comments received to 

the Service for review and 

consideration: 

• Email: sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov. 

• U.S. Mail: SEPA Responsible 

Official, Annie Szvetecz, Washington 

Department of Natural Resources, SEPA 

Center, P.O. Box 47001, Olympia, WA 

98504–7001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mark Ostwald of the Service at (360) 

753–9564 (phone); 

Mark_Ostwald@fws.gov (email); or by 

U.S. mail to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Washington Fish and Wildlife 

Office, 510 Desmond Dr. SE., Suite 102, 

Lacey, WA 98503; or, alternatively, 

contact Annie Szvetecz, SEPA 

Responsible Official, WDNR, at (360) 

902–112 (phone); 

sepacenter@dnr.wa.gov (email). In 

addition, information on this proposed 

action is also available at the WDNR’s 

Web site at http://www.dnr.wa.gov/ 

ResearchScience/Topics/ 

TrustLandsHCP/Pages/ 

lm_hcp_marbled_murrelet_main.aspx 

and the Service’s Web site at http:// 

www.fws.gov/wafwo/index.html. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Meeting Location Accommodation 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations in order to attend and 

participate in the public scoping 

meetings should contact Mark Ostwald 

with the Service or Annie Szvetecz with 

the WDNR (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT above). In order to 

allow sufficient time to process 

requests, please call no later than one 

week before the public meeting. 

Information regarding this proposed 

action is available in alternative formats 

upon request. 

Background 

In 1996, the WDNR released their 

draft HCP for forest management 

activities covering 1.6 million acres of 

forested State trust lands within the 

range of the northern spotted owl (Strix 

occidentalis caurina) in Washington. A 

DEIS (dated March 1996) jointly 

developed by the Service, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, and the 

WDNR was announced in the Federal 

Register on April 5, 1996 (61 FR 15297). 

The DEIS analyzed reasonable 

management alternatives, including the 

HCP. A notice of availability for the 

Final EIS (FEIS) was published in the 

Federal Register on November 1, 1996 

(61 FR 56563). On January 30, 1997, the 

Service issued an ITP (PRT No. 812521) 

for the WDNR HCP. The Service’s ITP 

decision and the availability of related 

decision documents were announced in 

the Federal Register on February 27, 

1997 (62 FR 8980). 

The WDNR HCP commits WDNR to 

developing a long-term conservation 

strategy for the marbled murrelet (HCP 

IV. 39). However, during development 

of the HCP, it was determined that there 

was not enough scientific information to 

credibly develop a long-term 

conservation strategy for the marbled 

murrelet on WDNR lands. For that 

reason, the WDNR developed an interim 

conservation strategy for the marbled 

murrelet (HCP IV. 39), which is 

currently being implemented. The 

principal intent of the interim 

conservation strategy was to locate 

occupied marbled murrelet sites and not 

foreclose future options for long-term 

conservation of the marbled murrelet on 

WDNR lands. Briefly, the interim 

marbled murrelet conservation strategy 

included the following: (1) Suitable 

habitat blocks are identified, with 

harvest on these blocks deferred; (2) 

habitat relationship studies are 

undertaken to determine the relative 

importance, based on occupancy, of 

identified habitat blocks; (3) following 

completion of the habitat relationship 

studies, the lowest quality habitat 

blocks are made available for timber 

harvest (these areas, in the poorest 

quality habitats, were expected to 

contain about 5 percent of the murreletoccupied sites on HCP-covered lands); 

(4) the higher quality habitat blocks 

identified from the habitat relationships 

study are surveyed for marbled murrelet 

occupancy, and occupied habitat are 

protected, along with some unoccupied 

habitat; and (5) development of a longterm conservation strategy for marbled 

murrelets is undertaken on WDNR 

lands. 

For southwest Washington and the 

Olympic Peninsula, the WDNR has 

completed steps 1 through 4 listed 

above. For step 5, the WDNR 

contemplated proposing an amendment 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES