1246 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Notices 

Note: A property meets the low-vacancy 

threshold if it is located in a county that was 

below the national rental vacancy rate for 

units affordable to low-income households in 

2000 (7.3 percent) and was within the 80th 

percentile of low-income rental vacancy rates 

(8.7 percent) as measured by the 2009 5 year 

ACS (meaning that 80 percent of counties 

had a vacancy rate below 8.7 percent in the 

2009 5 year ACS). 

[FR Doc. 2013–00072 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R8–R–2012–N270; 

FXRS12610800000–134–FF08RSDC00] 

Otay River Estuary Restoration 

Project; South San Diego Bay Unit and 

Sweetwater Marsh Unit of the San 

Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, 

California; Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent; reinitiation of 

scoping and request for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), are 

reinitiating scoping with regard to the 

environmental impact statement (EIS) 

for the proposed Otay River Estuary 

Restoration Project. As originally 

proposed, the project involved the 

restoration of estuarine and salt marsh 

(subtidal and intertidal wetlands) 

habitats within the western terminus of 

the Otay River and a portion of the salt 

ponds in the San Diego Bay National 

Wildlife Refuge–South San Diego Bay 

Unit. Based on information developed 

since the original scoping period, the 

proposed project may now also include 

the restoration of a portion of the D 

Street Fill, located within the San Diego 

Bay National Wildlife Refuge– 

Sweetwater Marsh Unit. We originally 

published a notice of intent on 

November 14, 2011 (76 FR 70480), and 

scoping comments were accepted 

through January 12, 2012. Since then, 

we have expanded the Area of Potential 

Effect of the restoration project to 

include the salt ponds and D Street Fill 

within the San Diego Bay National 

Wildlife Refuge. This second notice 

advises the public that we intend to 

gather additional information through 

scoping regarding an EIS for the 

expanded project. We encourage the 

public and other agencies to participate 

in the NEPA scoping process by sending 

written suggestions and information on 

the issues and concerns that should be 

addressed in the draft EIS, including the 

range of alternatives, appropriate 

mitigation measures, and the nature and 

extent of potential environmental 

impacts. Comments submitted during 

the earlier scoping period do not need 

to be resubmitted. 

DATES: To ensure that we have adequate 

time to evaluate and incorporate 

suggestions and other input, we must 

receive your comments on or before 

February 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send your comments or 

requests for more information by one of 

the following methods. 

Email: Otay_NOI@fws.gov. Please 

include ‘‘Otay Estuary NOI’’ in the 

subject line of the message 

Fax: Attn: Brian Collins, (619) 476– 

9149 

U.S. Mail: Brian Collins, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, San Diego National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, P.O. Box 

2358, Chula Vista, CA 91912 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Collins, Refuge Manager (619– 

575–2704, extension 302), or Andrew 

Yuen, Project Leader (619–476–9150, 

extension 100). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In 2006, we completed a 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan 

(CCP) and EIS/Record of Decision (ROD) 

to guide the management of the San 

Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge over 

a 15-year period (71 FR 64552, 

November 2, 2006). The wildlife and 

habitat management goal of the selected 

management alternative in the CCP for 

the South San Diego Bay Unit is to 

‘‘Protect, manage, enhance, and restore 

* * * coastal wetlands * * * to benefit 

the native fish, wildlife, and plant 

species supported within the South San 

Diego Bay Unit.’’ One of the strategies 

identified to meet this goal is to restore 

native habitats in the Otay River 

floodplain and the salt ponds. The 

wildlife and habitat management goal of 

the selected alternative for the 

Sweetwater Marsh Unit is to ‘‘Protect, 

manage, enhance, and restore coastal 

wetland and upland habitats to benefit 

native fish, wildlife, and plant species 

within the Sweetwater Marsh Unit.’’ 

The proposed restoration project 

represents step-down restoration 

planning for the western portion of the 

Otay River floodplain, salt ponds, and D 

Street Fill. The site-specific EIS for this 

project will tier from the programmatic 

EIS and ROD prepared for the CCP. 

Funding for the proposed restoration is 

being provided by the Poseidon 

Resources Carlsbad Desalination Project 

to fulfill part of their mitigation 

requirement for the desalination project. 

On November 15, 2007, the California 

Coastal Commission (Commission) 

approved a Coastal Development Permit 

(CDP No. E–06–013) for the Poseidon 

desalination facility in Carlsbad, San 

Diego County. As part of that approval, 

the Commission required Poseidon to 

implement a Marine Life Mitigation 

Plan (MLMP). 

In early 2010, Poseidon submitted an 

initial proposal to the Commission 

identifying possible mitigation sites. 

The submittal compared about a dozen 

potential sites in the Southern 

California Bight and concluded that the 

Otay River floodplain portion of the San 

Diego Bay NWR was most suited to 

provide the type and amount of 

mitigation the MLMP required. 

Commission staff and members of the 

Commission’s Scientific Advisory Panel 

reviewed Poseidon’s analysis and 

concurred that the Otay River floodplain 

site was most likely to meet the MLMP 

requirements and objectives. Final site 

selection required approval by both the 

Commission and the San Diego Regional 

Water Quality Control Board 

(SDRWQCB). On February 9, 2011, the 

Commission unanimously approved the 

Otay River floodplain site, and the site 

was approved by the SDRWQCB on 

March 9, 2011. On October 15, 2012, the 

Commission’s Executive Director 

approved an 18-month extension to 

Poseidon Resources to submit a Coastal 

Development Permit application based 

on the potential additional benefits of 

restoration or partial restoration of salt 

ponds as part of the Otay River Estuary 

Restoration Project. The MLMP 

requirements and objectives are 

consistent with the goals and objectives 

set forth in our CCP for the Otay River 

floodplain, salt ponds, and D Street Fill. 

Prior to implementation of the 

restoration project, the California 

Coastal Commission must approve a 

Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for 

the proposed restoration. In accordance 

with the California Environmental 

Quality Act, the CDP process is exempt 

from the requirement of preparing an 

environmental impact report. The 

Commission’s staff report and findings 

related to the CDP application for the 

project will be the environmental 

analysis document prepared under the 

Commission’s certified regulatory 

program. The Commission will allow 

sufficient opportunity during the CDP 

process for public review and comment. 

Proposed Project 

We propose to convert disturbed 

uplands within the western portion of 

the Otay River floodplain and salt ponds 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2013 / Notices 1247 

to functional estuarine and salt marsh 

habitats. We may also restore a portion 

of the D Street Fill to salt marsh habitat. 

Upland buffers to be provided around 

portions of the restored wetlands would 

be planted with native upland and 

wetland/upland transitional vegetation. 

The major goals of the project are to 

protect, manage, enhance, and restore 

open water coastal wetlands and native 

upland to benefit native fish, wildlife, 

and plant species supported within the 

South San Diego Bay Unit and 

Sweetwater Marsh Unit of the San Diego 

Bay NWR and to provide habitat for 

migratory shorebirds and other saltmarsh-dependent species. 

The uplands portion of the project 

site, which is located within the City of 

San Diego to the west of Interstate 5 

between Main Street to the north and 

Palm Avenue to the south, is included 

entirely within an area managed by the 

Service as a National Wildlife Refuge. 

The eastern portion of the uplands site 

is owned by the Service in fee title, 

while the western portion is leased to 

the Service by the State Lands 

Commission. D Street Fill is located 

west of Interstate 5 and south of the 

Sweetwater River. The Salt Ponds are 

located west of Interstate 5 and south of 

the Chula Vista Marina. 

In order to restore estuarine habitat in 

the Otay River floodplain, we have 

initially estimated that approximately 

75 acres would need to be graded to 

provide both the wetland and upland 

components of the proposed restoration. 

To achieve elevations appropriate for 

supporting the desired estuarine habitat 

types, excavation of 3 to 11 feet of soil 

over an area of approximately 65 acres 

would be required, generating an 

estimated 750,000 to 1 million cubic 

yards of material. The excavated soil 

may be used to create estuarine and salt 

marsh habitats in the salt ponds, with 

the remainder being transported off site 

to an approved disposal site. The 

proposed wetlands would be tidally 

connected to San Diego Bay, directly 

and through the existing Otay River 

channel. Additional grading to 

potentially deepen and widen the Otay 

River channel from the western edge of 

the project site out to the mouth of the 

river, and potentially dredging channels 

in the mudflats to increase tidal 

circulation to the adjacent restored salt 

ponds, may be needed pending 

hydraulic modeling. At the D Street Fill, 

material would be excavated and 

removed to restore historic salt marsh. 

Public Comment 

We are furnishing this second notice 

in accordance with section 1501.7 of the 

NEPA implementing regulations, to 

obtain suggestions and information from 

other agencies and the public on the 

scope of issues to be addressed in the 

EIS. The Service is currently developing 

a range of restoration alternatives to be 

analyzed in the draft EIS, and we invite 

written comments from interested 

parties to ensure identification of the 

full range of alternatives, issues, and 

concerns. Information gathered through 

this scoping process will assist us in 

developing a range of alternatives. A 

detailed description of the proposed 

action and alternatives will be included 

in the EIS. The EIS will also address the 

direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts 

of the alternatives on environmental 

resources and identify appropriate 

mitigation measures for adverse 

environmental effects. 

Written comments we receive become 

part of the public record associated with 

this action. Before including your 

address, phone number, email address, 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that your entire 

comment, including your personal 

identifying information, may be made 

publicly available at any time. While 

you can ask us in your comment to 

withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

In addition to providing written 

comments, the public is encouraged to 

attend a public scoping meeting to 

provide us with suggestions and 

information on the scope of issues and 

alternatives to consider when drafting 

the EIS. A public scoping meeting will 

be held in San Diego County, California, 

in early 2013. We will mail a separate 

announcement to the public with the 

exact date, time, and location of the 

public scoping meeting. Requests to be 

contacted about the scoping meeting 

should be directed to the contact 

provided under ADDRESSES above. We 

will accept both oral and written 

comments at the scoping meeting. 

Written comments previously provided 

in response to the November 2011 

notice of intent and during the 

December 2011 scoping meeting are part 

of the public record and will be 

considered during our NEPA review. 

Comments submitted previously do not 

need to be resubmitted. 

NEPA Compliance 

We will conduct environmental 

review 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. We anticipate that a draft 

EIS will be available for public review 

in the winter of 2014. 

Alexandra Pitts, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest 

Region. 

[FR Doc. 2013–00134 Filed 1–7–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–862] 

Certain Electronic Devices, Including 

Wireless Communication Devices, 

Tablet Computers, Media Players, and 

Televisions, and Components Thereof; 

Institution of Investigation Pursuant to 

United States Code 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

November 30, 2012, under section 337 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 

19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Ericsson 

Inc. of Plano, Texas and 

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson of 

Stockholm, Sweden. Letters 

supplementing the complaint were filed 

on December 3, December 12, and 

December 19, 2012. The complaint 

alleges violations of section 337 based 

upon the importation into the United 

States, the sale for importation, and the 

sale within the United States after 

importation of certain electronic 

devices, including wireless 

communication devices, tablet 

computers, media players, and 

televisions, and components thereof by 

reason of infringement of certain claims 

of U.S. Patent No. 6,029,052 (‘‘the ‘052 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,058,359 (‘‘the 

‘359 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,278,888 

(‘‘the ‘888 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 

6,301,556 (‘‘the ‘556 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 6,418,310 (‘‘the ‘310 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 6,445,917 (‘‘the ‘917 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,473,506 (‘‘the 

‘506 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,519,223 

(‘‘the ‘223 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 

6,624,832 (‘‘the ‘832 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 6,772,215 (‘‘the ‘215 patent’’); 

and U.S. Patent No. 8,169,992 (‘‘the ‘992 

patent’’). The complaint further alleges 

that an industry in the United States 

exists or is in the process of being 

established as required by subsection 

(a)(2) of section 337. 

The complainants request that the 

Commission institute an investigation 

and, after the investigation, issue an 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with