16188 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Notices 

There are no capital costs or operating 

and maintenance costs associated with 

this collection. 

Dated: April 3, 2009. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission, Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–8017 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Environmental Impact Report (DEIS/ 

EIR) for the Aliso Creek, Orange 

County, CA 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DOD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The purpose of the study is to 

evaluate an approximately 7-mile reach 

of the Aliso Creek and 1,000 feet of the 

Wood Canyon tributary to Aliso Creek 

located in Orange County in the Cities 

of Laguna Beach, Laguna Nigel, and 

Aliso Viejo, CA and unincorporated 

Orange County. Much of the 7-mile 

reach is located within the Aliso and 

Wood Canyons Wilderness Park, which 

is owned and managed by Orange 

County. The focus of the project will be 

on watershed improvements to restore 

the creek’s dynamic function and 

habitat for endangered species by 

developing alternatives for ecosystem 

restoration for impacted reaches of the 

creek. The restoration project will focus 

on revitalization of the riparian 

vegetation community; establishment of 

an environmental corridor to benefit 

wildlife and sensitive species; creek 

stabilization, and addressing flood risk 

management. The 7-mile reach of Aliso 

Creek is located entirely within Orange 

County, CA. 

DATES: Provide comments by May 10, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to 

Deborah Lamb at U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Los Angeles District, CESPL– 

PD–RL, P.O. Box 532711, Los Angeles, 

CA 90053–2325. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Deborah Lamb, Regional Planning 

Section at (213) 452–3798; fax (213) 

452–4204 or e-mail at 

Deborah.L.Lamb@usace.army.mil 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. Authorization. The proposed study 

is authorized by House Document No. 

838, 76th Congress 3rd Session, dated 

May 1954, which reads as follows: 

‘‘Resolved by the Committee on Public 

Works of the House of Representatives, 

United States, that the Board of Engineers for 

Rivers and Harbors is hereby requested to 

review the reports on (a) San Gabriel River 

and Tributaries, published as House 

Document No. 838, 76th Congress, 3rd 

Session; and (b) Santa Ana River and 

Tributaries, published as House Document 

No. 135, 81st Congress, 1st Session; and (c) 

the project authorized by the Flood Control 

Act of 1936 for the protection of the 

metropolitan area in Orange County, with a 

view toward determining the advisability of 

modification of the authorized projects in the 

interest of flood control and related 

purposes.’’ 

2. Background. Aliso Creek. While 

much of the Aliso Creek project area is 

within an Orange County wilderness 

park and within the Natural 

Communities Conservation Plan/Habitat 

Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) Nature 

Reserve of Orange County (NROC), the 

creek is in a highly urbanized area with 

a high population concentration. As 

such, Aliso Creek has numerous water 

resource issues related to both human 

actions and natural processes which 

have raised concerns about the longterm survival of the watershed 

ecosystem. Fundamental problems that 

have been identified include channel 

instability, degraded water quality, loss 

of fish and wildlife habitat, and flood 

damage. Since 1997, there has been a 

multi-jurisdictional effort to address 

problems within the Aliso Creek 

watershed. The Aliso Creek Watershed 

Management Feasibility Study, 

sponsored by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Orange County, and 

municipalities and water districts 

within the Aliso Creek watershed 

boundary, was completed in July 1999. 

A wide range of technical studies have 

since been completed. Re-establishment 

of a healthy and sustainable watershed 

environment would serve to improve 

the environmental and economic 

conditions of the creek, including 

improving water quality, native habitat, 

and reducing flood damage. 

Alternatives to be considered are 

those that will further reduce 

degradation of the creek and the 

riparian ecosystem, improve ground and 

surface water quality, and reduce 

adverse water quality impacts from 

runoff. 

3. Scoping Process. a. A scoping 

meeting is scheduled for 7, May 2009, 

6:30pm to 8:30pm at Mission Viejo City 

Council Chamber, 200 Civic Center 

Mission Viejo, CA 92691, (949) 470– 

3000. 

For additional information on dates, 

times and locations please contact 

Deborah Lamb (see ADDRESSES), or at 

(213) 452–3798 or e-mail at: 

deborah.l.lamb@usace.army.mil. 

Potential impacts associated with the 

proposed action will be evaluated. 

Resource categories that will be 

analyzed include: Physical 

environment, geology, biological 

resources, air quality, water quality, 

recreational usage, aesthetics, cultural 

resources, transportation, noise, 

hazardous waste, socioeconomics, 

safety, and sustainability. 

b. Participation of affected Federal, 

state and local resource agencies, Native 

American groups and concerned interest 

groups/individuals is encouraged in the 

scoping process. Public participation 

will be especially important in defining 

the scope of analysis in the Draft EIS/ 

EIR, identifying significant 

environmental issues and impact 

analysis of the Draft EIS/EIR and 

providing useful information such as 

published and unpublished data, 

personal knowledge of relevant issues 

and recommending mitigation measures 

associated with the proposed action. 

c. Those interested in providing 

information or data relevant to the 

environmental or social impacts that 

should be included or considered in the 

environmental analysis can furnish this 

information by writing to the points of 

contact indicated above or by attending 

the public scoping meeting. A mailing 

list will also be established so pertinent 

data may be distributed to interested 

parties. 

Dated: March 27, 2009. 

Thomas H. Magness, 

Colonel, U.S. Army, District Commander. 

[FR Doc. E9–8107 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Town of Nags Head, Beach 

Nourishment Project in Dare County, 

NC 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (COE), Wilmington District, 

Regulatory Division, has received a 

request for Department of the Army 

authorization, pursuant to Section 404 

of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 

of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 

from the Town of Nags Head to dredge 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Notices 16189 

up to 4.6 million cubic yards of beachquality sediment from an offshore 

borrow source, and deposit the material 

along approximately 10 miles of ocean 

shoreline in the Town of Nags Head. 

The applicant proposes to utilize a 

self-contained hopper dredge during a 

proposed construction window from 

April through September to undertake 

the dredging operations and discharge 

the sand on the beach via submerged 

pipeline. In addition, the applicant’s 

proposed offshore borrow areas include 

sites identified in the U.S. Army Corps 

of Engineers, Wilmington District’s EIS, 

entitled Final Feasibility Report and 

Environmental Impact Statement on 

Hurricane Protection and Beach Erosion 

Control, dated September 2000. 

DATES: A public scoping meeting for the 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

(DEIS) will be held at the Nags Head 

Fire Station #16, at 5314 S. Croatan 

Highway, Nags Head, NC 27959 on 

April 28, 2009 at 3:30 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of comments and 

questions regarding scoping of the Draft 

EIS may be addressed to: U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, 

Regulatory Division—Washington 

Regulatory Field Office, 107 Union 

Drive, Suite 205, Washington, NC 

27889, Attn: File Number SAW 2006– 

40282. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions about the proposed action 

and DEIS can be directed to Mr. Raleigh 

Bland, Regulatory Division, telephone: 

(252) 975–1616, Extension 23. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

project site is located off NC Highway 

12, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in 

the Town of Nags Head, Dare County, 

North Carolina. The proposed project 

totals approximately 10 miles of ocean 

shoreline beginning approximately 1 

mile from the town’s northern limit and 

extending south to the town line 

adjacent to the Cape Hatteras National 

Seashore. The proposed borrow area is 

located in the Atlantic Ocean 

approximately 2–3 miles offshore of the 

project site. The Town of Nags Head 

encompasses approximately 11 miles of 

ocean shoreline on a barrier island 

located at the northern end of North 

Carolina’s Outer Banks. The width of 

the berm of the island’s dune system 

varies considerably with location along 

the town’s beach and with the season. 

Along most of the project area, the 

winter berm is non-existent due to 

continuing erosion processes. Dune 

habitat is currently decreasing due to 

excessive erosion of the base or toe of 

the dunes by waves that travel 

unimpeded over eroded wet beach to 

directly impact dunes. 

The Town of Nags Head has provided 

the following information about the 

purpose of the proposed project: 

The purpose of the proposed project 

is to nourish the island’s ocean 

shoreline to restore eroded areas to a 

condition that would be able to sustain 

chronic erosion and the short-term 

impact of storms for at least 4–5 years, 

protect upland property, infrastructure, 

and tax base, and widen the recreational 

beach by 50–125 feet waterward of the 

ordinary high water mark. 

The proposed borrow area includes 

portions of offshore areas identified by 

the Corps of Engineers in the 2000 

Federal Dare County Project. Several 

sub areas have been sampled and tested 

for sediment compatibility. Water 

depths in the borrow area are 

approximately 40–55 feet. The 

anticipated optimal equipment for 

excavations will include ocean-certified, 

self-contained hopper dredges. Such 

equipment typically excavates shallow 

trenches (approximately 2–3 foot 

sections) in each pass (leaving narrow 

undisturbed areas at the margin of each 

cut), then travels to a buoyed pipeline 

anchored close to shore. Discharge to 

the beach is via submerged pipeline 

across the surf zone, then by way of 

shore-based pipe positioned along the 

dry beach. Only a small area of the 

Corps borrow area will be required to 

provide up to 4.6 million cubic yards of 

beach quality material. The applicant is 

coordinating the specific area for use in 

the proposed project with the Corps 

with the following understanding: (1) 

The final borrow area required for the 

emergency beach nourishment project 

can be limited to the equivalent of a 0.9 

square-mile (approximately 575 acres) 

area, (2) the borrow area used will be 

contiguous rather than a series of small 

impact areas, (3) once used, the borrow 

area will no longer be available for use, 

consistent with the Dare County Project, 

and (4) the borrow area will be 

delineated so as to avoid ongoing 

biological monitoring stations 

established by the Corps in connection 

with the Dare County Project. The 

project will be built in approximate 

1–2 mile sections, optimizing the 

disposition of pipeline. Sections will be 

pumped into place with the aid of 

temporary dikes pushed up by 

bulldozers in the surf zone. Daily 

operations will impact approximately 

500–1,000 linear feet of shoreline as 

work progresses in either direction from 

the submerged pipeline. Upon 

completion of a section, the submerged 

pipe and beach-building equipment will 

be shifted to the next section. As 

construction progresses, sections will be 

graded to final contours, dressed to 

eliminate low areas, and opened for use 

by the public. Support equipment will 

be shifted out of completed sections as 

soon as practicable, so that construction 

activities in a particular reach will not 

disrupt normal beach use for only a 

month or so at any locality. The finished 

sections will be allowed to adjust to 

natural processes for several months. 

The final process will include the 

placement of dune fencing and/or dune 

plantings as needed or required. 

Proposed Impacts to Wetlands and 

Surface Waters: Surface waters and 

jurisdictional areas have been identified 

for the proposed project site. Field 

reviews of the project area have revealed 

that there are no vegetated freshwater or 

coastal wetlands located in the project 

area. The proposed project will impact 

approximately 10 miles of ocean beach 

shoreline and 575 acres of ocean 

bottom. 

Scope of Investigations: Based upon 

the proposed impacts to waters of the 

United States, the Town of Nags Head, 

and their consultant, Coastal Science & 

Engineering, has indicated to the U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers that they are 

willing to pursue an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed 

Project. The scope of the EIS 

investigation will include the following: 

Alternatives analyses, affected 

environment, environmental 

consequences, and secondary and 

cumulative environmental impacts. 

Alternatives Analyses: Council on 

Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations (40 CFR 1502.14(a)) require 

an EIS to ‘‘rigorously explore and 

objectively evaluate all reasonable 

alternatives’’ for a proposed action. The 

regulations (40 CFR 1502.14(b)) further 

require that substantial treatment be 

made of each alternative considered in 

detail, including the proposed action. 

The Town of Nags Head has identified 

three alternatives for the proposed 

project, including (1) no action; (2) 

abandon property, retreat, and relocate; 

and (3) nourish the beach. The factors 

used to compare the alternatives will be 

the same for each of the alternatives. 

Affected Environment: CEQ 

regulations (40 CFR 1502.15) require the 

EIS to describe the environment of the 

areas to be affected or created by the 

alternatives under consideration. The 

data and analysis shall be 

commensurate with the importance of 

the impact. Based upon preliminary 

evaluation of the proposed Project, it 

appears the primary areas of 

environmental concern will focus on the 

use of a hopper dredge during the warm 

weather season and the potential effect 

on marine and threatened and 

endangered resources. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
16190 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 67 / Thursday, April 9, 2009 / Notices 

In preparation for the EIS, the 

following studies have been completed 

or are ongoing for the proposed Project: 

• Meetings with Federal and State 

regulatory and resource agencies (2005 

to present). 

• DA application and Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (2006). 

• Data compilations and surveys 

including, but not limited to littoral 

processes, cultural resources, biological 

surveys, sediment characteristics, 

economic, draft Essential Fish Habitat, 

hopper dredge protocol, and a 

Biological Assessment (2006 to present). 

• Public Notice (2006). 

• Federal Project Comparison (2007). 

• SEPA (2007). 

• Biological Opinion/USFWS (2008). 

• EFH Assessment/NMFS (2008). 

• State SEPA Record of Decision 

(2009). 

Environmental Consequences: CEQ 

regulations (40 CFR 1502.16) state the 

EIS will include the environmental 

impacts of the alternatives including the 

proposed action, any adverse 

environmental effects which cannot be 

avoided should the proposal be 

implemented, the relationship between 

short-term uses of man’s environment 

and the maintenance and enhancement 

of long-term productivity, and any 

irreversible or irretrievable 

commitments of resources which would 

be involved in the proposal should it be 

implemented. The EIS will identify and 

disclose the direct impacts of the 

proposed project and study a reasonable 

number of alternatives on the following: 

topography, geology, soils, climate, 

biotic communities, wetlands, fish and 

wildlife resources, endangered and 

threatened species, hydrology, water 

resources and water quality, 

floodplains, hazardous materials, air 

quality, noise, aesthetics, recreational 

resources, historical and cultural 

resources, socio-economic, land use, 

public health and safety, energy 

requirements and conservation, natural 

or non-renewable resources, drinking 

waters, and environmental justice. 

Secondary and Cumulative 

Environmental Impacts: Cumulative 

impacts result from the incremental 

impact of the proposed action when 

added to past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions, regardless of 

what agency or person undertakes the 

action. Geographic Information System 

(GIS) data and mapping will be used to 

evaluate and quantify secondary and 

cumulative impacts of the proposed 

Project with particular emphasis given 

to waters and marine resources. 

Mitigation: CEQ regulations (40 CFR 

1502.14, 1502.16, and 1508.20) require 

the EIS to include appropriate 

mitigation measures, if applicable. The 

USACE has adopted, through the CEQ, 

a mitigation policy which embraces the 

concepts of ‘‘no net loss of wetlands’’ 

and project sequencing. The purpose of 

this policy is to restore and maintain the 

chemical, biological, and physical 

integrity of ‘‘Waters of the United 

States,’’ specifically wetlands. 

Mitigation of wetland impacts has been 

defined by the CEQ to include: 

avoidance of impacts (to wetlands), 

minimizing impacts, rectifying impacts, 

reducing impacts over time, and 

compensating for impacts (40 CFR 

1508.20). Each of these aspects 

(avoidance, minimization, and 

compensatory mitigation) must be 

considered in sequential order. As part 

of the EIS, if applicable, the applicant 

will develop a compensatory mitigation 

plan detailing the methodology and 

approach to compensate for unavoidable 

impacts to waters of the U.S. 

NEPA/SEPA Preparation and 

Permitting: Because the proposed Nags 

Head project requires approvals from 

Federal and State agencies under both 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) and the State Environmental 

Policy Act (SEPA), a joint Federal and 

State Environmental Impact Statement 

(EIS) will be prepared. The U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers will serve as the lead 

agency for the process. The EIS will be 

the NEPA document for the Corps of 

Engineers (404 permit) and the SEPA 

document for the State of North 

Carolina (401 permit). 

Based on the size, complexity, and 

potential impacts of the proposed 

project, the Applicant has been advised 

by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to 

identify and disclose the environmental 

impacts of the proposed project in an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 

Within the EIS, the Applicant will 

conduct a thorough environmental 

review, including an evaluation of a 

reasonable number of alternatives. After 

distribution and review of the Draft EIS 

and Final EIS, the Applicant 

understands that the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers will issue a Record of 

Decision (ROD) for the project. The ROD 

will document the completion of the EIS 

process and will serve as a basis for 

permitting decisions by Federal and 

State agencies. 

Jefferson M. Ryscavage, 

Colonel, U.S. Army, District Commander. 

[FR Doc. E9–8084 Filed 4–8–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The Director, Information 

Collection Clearance Division, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of Management, invites 

comments on the proposed information 

collection requests as required by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before June 8, 

2009. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires 

that the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) provide interested 

Federal agencies and the public an early 

opportunity to comment on information 

collection requests. OMB may amend or 

waive the requirement for public 

consultation to the extent that public 

participation in the approval process 

would defeat the purpose of the 

information collection, violate State or 

Federal law, or substantially interfere 

with any agency’s ability to perform its 

statutory obligations. The Director, 

Information Collection Clearance 

Division, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of 

Management, publishes that notice 

containing proposed information 

collection requests prior to submission 

of these requests to OMB. Each 

proposed information collection, 

grouped by office, contains the 

following: (1) Type of review requested, 

e.g., new, revision, extension, existing 

or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary 

of the collection; (4) Description of the 

need for, and proposed use of, the 

information; (5) Respondents and 

frequency of collection; and (6) 

Reporting and/or Recordkeeping 

burden. OMB invites public comment. 

The Department of Education is 

especially interested in public comment 

addressing the following issues: (1) Is 

this collection necessary to the proper 

functions of the Department; (2) will 

this information be processed and used 

in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate 

of burden accurate; (4) how might the 

Department enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (5) how might the 

Department minimize the burden of this 

collection on the respondents, including 

through the use of information 

technology. 


dwashington3 on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES