Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16659

Sec. 3, lots 2 to 4 inclusive, S1⁄2N1⁄2,

N1⁄2S1⁄2, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4 and SE1⁄4SW1⁄4;

Sec. 4, lots 1 and 2, S1⁄2NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4,

NW1⁄4SW1⁄4, S1⁄2SW1⁄4 and SE1⁄4;

Sec. 5, SE1⁄4;

Sec. 9, N1⁄2NE1⁄4, SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, E1⁄2NW1⁄4,

NW1⁄4NW1⁄4, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, N1⁄2SE1⁄4 and

SE1⁄4NE1⁄4;

Sec. 10, W1⁄2NW1⁄4;

Sec. 11, NE1⁄4;

Sec. 12, NW1⁄4.

The areas described aggregate 3,805.87

acres in Cassia County.

For a period of 90 days from the date

of publication of this notice, all persons

who wish to submit comments,

suggestions, or objections in connection

with the proposed withdrawal may

present their views in writing to the

Idaho State Director of the Bureau of

Land Management.

Notice is hereby given that an

opportunity for a public meeting is

afforded in connection with the

proposed withdrawal. All interested

persons who desire a public meeting for

the purpose of being heard on the

proposed withdrawal must submit a

written request to the Idaho State

Director within 90 days from the date of

publication of this notice. Upon

determination by the authorized officer

that a public meeting will be held, a

notice of time and place will be

published in the Federal Register at

least 30 days before the scheduled date

of the meeting.

The application will be processed in

accordance with the regulations set

forth in 43 CFR 2300.

For a period of 2 years from the date

of publication of this notice in the

Federal Register, the land will be

segregated as specified above unless the

application is denied or canceled or the

withdrawal is approved prior to this

date. The temporary uses which may be

permitted during this segregation period

are leases, licenses, permits, rights-ofway, etc.

The temporary segregation of the

lands in connection with this

withdrawal application shall not affect

administrative jurisdiction over the

lands, and the segregation shall not have

the effect of authorizing any use of the

lands by the Department of Agriculture.

Dated: March 22, 1995.

M. William Weigand,

State Office Unit Leader for Realty Unit.

[FR Doc. 95–8019 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–GG–M

Record of Decision Documenting the

Department of Interior’s Approval for

the Central Utah Water Conservancy

District To Proceed With the

Construction of the Diamond Fork

Pipeline, Access Road and

Appurtenant Facilities as Part of the

Diamond Fork System of the

Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah

Project, Utah

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant

Secretary for Water and Science,

Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability of the

Diamond Fork pipeline Record of

Decision.

Record of Decision

January, 1995

I. Introduction

This document constitutes the Record

of Decision (ROD) of the Department of

the Interior (Department), documenting

the Department’s approval for the

Central Utah Water Conservancy District

(District) to proceed with the

construction of the Diamond Fork

Pipeline, Access Road and Appurtenant

facilities (Diamond Fork Pipeline

System) as part of the Diamond Fork

System of the Bonneville Unit of the

Central Utah Project, as presented in the

Recommended Plan in the Final

Supplement to the Final Environmental

Impact Statement (INT–FES 90–7, dated

February 22, 1990) (1990 FS–FEIS),

prepared in compliance with the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA). This project was authorized as

a participating project of the Colorado

River Storage Project by the Act of April

11, 1956 (70 Stat. 105).

In accordance with the Record of

Decision signed by the Commissioner of

Reclamation on July 20, 1990 (1990

ROD), copy attached, the Bureau of

Reclamation (Reclamation) began

implementing the Recommended Plan

by constructing Syar Tunnel and the

Sixth Water Aqueduct. However,

pursuant to the Central Utah Project

Completion Act (Titles II through VI of

Public Law 102–575, 106 Stat. 4605,

October 30, 1992), (CUPCA), the District

has adopted the Recommended Plan for

the Diamond Fork Pipeline System as

described in the 1990 FS-FEIS, and

agrees to comply with the

environmental commitments,

constraints (e.g.—pipeline capacity and

diameter, annual transbasin diversion,

and other operational conditions), and

recommendations as described in the

1984 Final Environmental Impact

Statement (1984 FEIS) and the 1990 FSFEIS, and the January 5, 1995,

Biological Opinion, copy attached, and

to honor all applicable Federal and State

laws, including the Drainage and Minor

Construction (D&MC) contract dated

November 28, 1994, and the Compliance

and Cost Sharing Agreements between

the United States and the District dated

August 11, 1993.

II. Recommended Decision

The Program Director, CUP

Completion Act Office recommends

proceeding with the construction of the

Diamond Fork Pipeline, Access Road,

and Appurtenant facilities, as identified

in the Recommended Plan in the 1990

FS–FEIS. The Recommended Plan is the

most environmentally acceptable, and

consistent with the authorized project

plan. The Recommended Plan is briefly

summarized in section V of this ROD.

III. Basis for Decision

Approval of Reclamation’s

Recommended Plan in the 1990 ROD

was the direct result of a public

consultation and coordination process.

Of the three downsized alternatives

presented in the 1990 FS–FES, the

Recommended Plan is the most publicly

acceptable method of meeting

obligations of the 1980 Instream Flow

Agreement while allowing for

completion of the authorized project

plan as provided for in CUPCA.

In accordance with Section

202(a)(6)(B) of CUPCA, the Department

and the District executed a D&MC

contract on November 28, 1994, that

binds the District to provide the nonFederal cost sharing required in the

CUPCA for the Diamond Fork Pipeline,

Access Road, and Appurtenant

facilities, to design and construct these

facilities, and to comply with all Federal

fish, wildlife, recreation and

environmental laws in accordance with

the August 11, 1993, Compliance

Agreement.

In its Preconstruction Report that was

submitted to the Department on

December 12, 1994, copy enclosed, the

District officially adopted the

Recommended Plan and Mitigation

plan, and agreed to comply with the

environmental commitments that are

identified in the 1990 FS–FEIS for the

Diamond Fork System, and the

applicable provision of Reclamation’s

1990 ROD. Section VI, ‘‘Environmental

Commitments and Monitoring’’, of this

ROD summarizes the District’s

environmental commitments and

obligations.

On December 19, 1994, the

Department approved the District’s

Preconstruction report and documented

again the District’s obligations and

environmental commitments, copy
16660 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices

attached. The approval of the

Preconstruction Report and this ROD

fulfills the final prerequisites contained

in the August 11, 1993, Cost Sharing

Agreement required prior to initiation of

construction of the Diamond Fork

Pipeline System.

IV. Decision

The Department’s decision is to

approve the District proceeding with the

construction of the Diamond Fork

Pipeline, Access Road, and Appurtenant

facilities.

V. Recommended Plan

The Recommended Plan for the

system would facilitate the transbasin

diversion of an annual average of

101,900 acre-feet of Bonneville Unit

water and 61,500 acre-feet of Strawberry

Valley Project water from the Uinta

Basin to the Bonneville Basin.

Additionally, the system would

provide recreation and fishery benefits,

wildlife mitigation measures, flood and

water quality control, and potential

hydroelectric power generation. The

transbasin diversion (reduced by 37,900

acre-feet from the recommended plan in

the 1984 FEIS) would fulfill the

Instream Flow Agreement of 1980, the

goal of which was to mitigate up to 50

percent of the fishery impact caused by

the Bonneville Unit on streams in the

Uinta Basin. The remaining 50 percent

would be accomplished through the

Aquatic Mitigation Plan developed for

the Bonneville Unit. This plan was

finalized in December 1988.

Under the Recommended Plan, the

Diamond Fork Pipeline System would

receive water from Strawberry Reservoir

through the already completed Syar

Tunnel. From the tunnel outlet, water

would enter Sixth Water Aqueduct,

which would include Sixth Water

Pipeline, Sixth Water Shaft, and Sixth

Water Tunnel, all of which have been

completed. Water from the aqueduct

would be discharged into Sixth Water

Creek and subsequently enter the

proposed Monks Hollow Reservoir.

From the reservoir, a portion of the

water would enter the proposed

Diamond Fork Pipeline and be

conveyed to a proposed bifurcation

structure near the confluence of

Diamond Fork and the Spanish Fork

River. Monks Hollow Reservoir releases

not conveyed in the Diamond Fork

Pipeline would enter the Diamond Fork

stream channel below Monks Hollow

Dam and subsequently, the Spanish

Fork River.

The Diamond Fork Pipeline, with a

capacity of 510 cubic feet per second

(cfs), is included in the Recommended

Plan for the purpose of removing project

water, as well as existing high irrigation

flows, from the lower Diamond Fork

stream channel. The pipeline would

provide considerable enhancement of

the Diamond Fork fishery. Under project

conditions, the highest average monthly

flow below Monks Hollow Reservoir

would be 183 cfs. This compares to 294

cfs without the project. The lowest

average monthly flow for the minimum

year with the project is 5 cfs, as

compared to 3 cfs without the project.

Construction access will be provided by

the existing Diamond Fork Road, which

extends from U.S. Highway 6–89 at the

mouth of the canyon northeast along the

Diamond Fork stream channel. In many

areas the Diamond Fork Pipeline will be

located in the shoulder of the road.

Consequently, in conjunction with the

pipeline construction, about 7 miles of

the road will be improved to a 24-footwide asphalt-surfaced road.

VI. Environmental Commitments and

Monitoring

A. Environmental Commitments in the

1990 FS–FEIS

A list of the major environmental

commitments made for the Diamond

Fork Pipeline System is documented on

pages 195–196 of the 1990 FS–FEIS. In

the District’s Preconstruction Report,

the District committed to comply with

all the environmental commitments

associated with the construction of the

Diamond Fork Pipeline System. This

includes the following environmental

commitments:

1. A total capacity of 510 cfs will be

included in the Diamond Fork Pipeline

for the purpose of removing project

water, as well as existing high irrigation

flows, from the lower Diamond Fork to

mitigate potential project impacts and

provide enhancement to the fishery

resource.

2. Public fishing access will be

acquired in the lower 2 miles of

Diamond Fork.

3. A General Plan will be prepared by

the District and approved by the

Department and the managing agency

for the mitigation measures involving

land transfers to other agencies. Specific

wildlife management plans will be

prepared by the managing agencies for

each management area. The General

Plan and the specific wildlife

management plans will be approved by

the Department and the Fish and

Wildlife Service before mitigation lands

are developed or transferred to another

agency for management.

4. The District will continue

monitoring the nesting activity of

golden eagles in the Diamond Fork area

for a period of at least 5 years after

completion of the project.

B. Environmental Requirements of the

Central Utah Project Completion Act

The CUPCA and the documents

executed pursuant to that Act (the two

August 11, 1993, Agreements and the

November 28, 1994, D&MC contract) set

forth the District’s additional

environmental requirements.

Among the areas of concern are

minimum flow requirements. It is

anticipated that the Strawberry Valley

Project would continue to operate as it

does now. Under the M&I System plan,

Reclamation stipulated that Bonneville

Unit water conveyed through the

Diamond Fork drainage would be

limited to 30,000 acre-feet annually

until the Diamond Fork Power System

is in place. This limited delivery would

take place during the off-peak and

nonirrigation seasons and flows would

be limited so as to not degrade the

stream channels.

Title III of the CUPCA requires that

minimum flows be maintained in the

Diamond Fork stream between Monks

Hollow Dam and the confluence with

the Spanish Fork River. These required

flows are 80 cubic-feet per second from

May through September and 60 cubicfeet per second from October through

April.

The CUPCA also authorizes funds for

fish habitat restoration and

improvements in the Diamond Fork

River and Sixth Water Creek drainage.

Under the CUPCA, the Utah

Reclamation Mitigation and

Conservation Commission has

responsibility for administering the

mitigation and conservation funds

available under the Act.

C. Endangered Species—Conservation

Recommendations

As part of its environmental

compliance for the 1990 FS–FEIS,

Reclamation determined that the

construction and operation of the

Diamond Fork System would not affect

any listed nor candidate species

identified under the Endangered

Species Act. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife

Service (Service) concurred in the no

effect determination. Since the filing of

the FS–FEIS, a plant known as Ute

ladies’-tresses orchid (Spiranthes

diluvialis) has been added to the

endangered species list as a threatened

species. Consequently, the District

entered into Section 7 consultation with

the Service and submitted a Biological

Assessment to the Service for their

determination of effect. The Service’s

January 5, 1995, Biological Opinion

concludes that: (1) the water depletion
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 1995 / Notices 16661

associated with construction of the

Diamond Fork Pipeline System is 100

acre-feet or less, and sufficient progress

has been attained by the Recovery

Implementation Program to avoid the

likelihood of jeopardy to the Colorado

River endangered fish species; and (2)

the construction of the pipeline and

access road will affect, but is not likely

to jeopardize the continued existence of

the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid. The

Service made six conservation

recommendations pursuant to Section

7(a)(1) of the Endangered Species Act.

Conservation recommendations are

discretionary agency activities to

minimize or avoid adverse effects of a

proposed action on listed species or

critical habitat, to help implement

recovery plans, or to develop

information. In their January 5, 1995,

letter to the Service, copy enclosed, and

in their January 19, 1995, letter to the

Program Director, copy enclosed, the

District agreed to implement the

following Conservation

Recommendations included in the

January 5, 1995, Biological Opinion.

Those conservation recommendations

are stated verbatim as follows:

1. The District should prepare an

Environmental Commitment Checklist (ECC)

detailing requirements for construction

methods and associated activities that are

designed to avoid or minimize environmental

impacts of the construction project, including

impacts to the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid. For

example, the ECC should specify

requirements that will prevent impacts to the

orchid outside of the construction area;

establish the minimum necessary boundaries

of the construction zone; and, provide a

qualified individual to monitor construction

activity during stream crossings and at any

other sensitive locations identified by the

Service. The ECC should be prepared in

consultation with cooperating environmental

oversight agencies, including the Service.

The Service recommends that the District

provide this document for Service review

and approval prior to initiation of

construction.

2. The District should prepare a site

rehabilitation/revegetation plan in

consultation with, and acceptable to, both the

Service and the Forest Service. The plan

should include specifications for undesirable

plant species monitoring and management.

3. The District should conduct surveys for

the Ute ladies’-tresses orchid in areas to be

disturbed during the flowering season

immediately prior to construction. Plants

should be counted and flagged.

4. The District should provide funds for the

removal, holding, and transplanting of plants

that will be impacted by construction. Plants

should be transplanted to a holding facility

approved by the Service, such as the Red

Butte Garden and Arboretum of the

University of Utah. Plants should be

maintained there until the following

activities occur under the direction of the

Service:

a. Selected plants will be transplanted back

into the areas from which they were taken

when the sites have been rehabilitated and

appropriate conditions created to ensure

successful reestablishment.

b. Selected plants will be maintained in the

holding facility, and serve as propagation

stock as determined desirable, for future

reintroduction to other areas in the Diamond

Fork drainage or along the Wasatch Front.

This will ensure that there is a source of

genetically compatible individuals to

augment or replace populations that may be

impacted by the construction and operation

of the Diamond Fork System on Diamond

Fork and Spanish Fork drainage or Utah Lake

caused by operation of the Diamond Fork

System.

c. Plants selected by the Service would be

available to researchers for conducting

approved life history research.

5. After the identified plants have been

removed from the impact area, surface

substrates (top 6–12 inches) should be

scraped off and stockpiled. Following

construction, site rehabilitation activities

should include replacing the removed

surface materials. To the extent possible,

compaction and contamination of surface

soils with undesirable plant species or other

materials should be avoided.

6. The District should prepare and

implement a monitoring plan in consultation

with, and acceptable to, the Service and the

Forest Service. The monitoring plan should

be for a minimum of 10 years and have the

following objectives:

a. Document the presence and vigor of

orchid individuals transplanted back into

disturbed sites.

b. Determine the presence and number of

new individuals that appear on disturbed

sites.

c. Document hydrologic conditions,

principally soil moisture and depth to

groundwater, seasonally in disturbed sites.

d. Monitor the presence of undesirable

plant species and effects of management

activities for their control.

e. Over the 10 year monitoring period,

document major changes in plant community

composition, with particular focus on

detecting and documenting changes from a

wetland riparian community to a drier,

upland riparian community.

D. Environmental Permits

Several water quality permits must be

obtained prior to construction of the

Diamond Fork Pipeline, Access Road,

and Appurtenant facilities. The Clean

Water Act of 1977 (P.L. 95–217) requires

that Section 402 permits be obtained

from Utah Department of Environmental

Quality through authority granted by the

Environmental Protection Agency for

the discharge of any wastewater or

process water. Section 404(r) of P.L. 95–

217 contains provisions to exempt, in

certain instances, congressionally

authorized Federal projects from having

to obtain a Section 404 Permit from the

Army Corps of Engineers for discharge

of dredged or fill material into waters of

the United States. On November 29,

1994, the Department of the Interior’s

Program Director submitted the

Diamond Fork 1984 FEIS and 1990 FS–

FEIS to the Chairman of the U.S. Senate

Appropriations Subcommittee on

Energy and Water Development and the

U.S. House of Representatives

Appropriations Subcommittee on

Energy and Water Development to

ensure the project is in full compliance

with Section 404(r) of the Clean Water

Act, copies attached. The construction

contract will not be awarded and no

actual discharge of dredged or fill

material in connection with the

construction of the Diamond Fork

Pipeline System will occur until fiscal

year 1996 funds are appropriated by the

Congress.

E. Environmental Commitment Plan

The District will prepare a detailed

project Environmental Commitment

Plan, documenting all mitigation

measures and environmental

commitments made in the 1984 FEIS

and the 1990 FS–FEIS prior to the

award of the construction contract of the

Diamond Fork Pipeline System. The

Environmental Commitment Plan will

be developed during the final design

and implemented during construction,

and operation of the Recommended

Plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Additional

information on matters related to this

Federal Register notice can be obtained

at the address and telephone number set

forth below: Mr. Reed Murray, Program

Coordinator, CUP Completion Act

Office, Department of the Interior, 302

East 1860 South, Provo UT 84606–6154,

Telephone: (801) 379–1237.

Dated: March 30, 1995.

Ronald Johnston,

CUP Program Director, Department of the

Interior.

[FR Doc. 95–7995 Filed 3–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–RK–P

Office of the Secretary

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Public Advisory

Group; Meeting

AGENCY: Department of the Interior,

Office of the Secretary.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Department of the

Interior, Office of the Secretary is

announcing a public meeting of the

Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Public Advisory

Group.

DATES: April 20–21, 1995, at 8:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES: First floor conference room,

645 ‘‘G’’ Street, Anchorage, Alaska.