58370 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2010 / Notices 

properties. USACE Detroit District, and 

Wayne County, MI acting as the nonfederal sponsor, have formed a 

partnership to reevaluate the flooding 

issues along the NBEC. The GRR/EIS, 

will update a feasibility study and EIS 

completed by USACE in 1988. The 

purpose of this GRR/EIS is reanalysis of 

the federal interest in developing flood 

risk management measures on the 

NBEC. The analysis will include 

reformulation of the authorized plan 

from the 1988 study for applicability. 

The GRR/EIS will incorporate a review 

of developments in the floodplain 

during the last 22 years, consideration 

of changing needs of the local 

communities, and current 

environmental conditions. When 

complete, the GRR/EIS will recommend 

if flood mitigation measures should 

occur with federal assistance. Federal 

funding for the GRR/EIS phase 

originates from American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act funds, which requires 

the GRR/EIS to be developed on an 

accelerated schedule. 

Project Authority: The GRR/EIS is 

being completed based on authorization 

by Section 102 of the River and Harbor 

Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89–789). The 

original study Feasibility Report and 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Flood Protection in the Ecorse Creek 

Drainage Basin, Wayne County, 

Michigan, 1987 (Revised 1988) 

recommended the development of a 

retention basin as the selected plan. 

Construction of the selected plan from 

the 1988 feasibility study was further 

authorized by Section 101(a) (14) of the 

Water Resources Development Act 

(WRDA) of 1990. Construction never 

occurred. Project authorization was 

extended in Section 3179 of the WRDA 

of 2007 to conduct the GRR. 

Project Alternatives: A number of 

flood risk management alternatives will 

be evaluated as part of the GRR/EIS 

including retention basins, stream 

widening and restoration, flood walls 

and levees, along with non-structural 

measures such as management plans, 

warning systems and property 

acquisition. 

Draft EIS Scoping Process: The 

scoping process for public input will 

involve Federal, State, and local 

agencies, along with affected Indian 

tribes, other interested parties and 

entities. Coordination with natural 

resources and environmental agencies 

will be conducted under the Fish and 

Wildlife Coordination Act, Endangered 

Species Act, Clean Water Act, Clean Air 

Act, and the National Historic 

Preservation Act. A public meeting will 

be held (see DATES) to include 

discussion of environmental issues 

associated with potential flood risk 

management alternatives. 

Issues to be considered during the 

development of the Draft EIS and public 

review and input process include: 

aesthetics, dredged material disposal, 

water quality, air and noise quality, 

hazardous, toxic and radiological waste, 

threatened and endangered species, 

environmental justice, wetlands, 

historic properties, recreation, 

cumulative impacts, natural resource 

mitigation and other issues that may 

affect public health and welfare. It is 

estimated the Draft EIS will be available 

for public review and comment in late 

2011. 

John M. Niemiec, 

Project Manager. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23934 Filed 9–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

Notice of Intent To Prepare a 

Legislative Environmental Impact 

Statement for the Proposed Extension 

of the Chocolate Mountain Aerial 

Gunnery Range Land Withdrawal 

Lead Agency: Department of the Navy, 

DoD. 

Cooperating Agency: Bureau of Land 

Management, Department of the 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) of 1969 and regulations 

implemented by the Council on 

Environmental Quality (40 Code of 

Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500– 

1508), the Department of the Navy 

(DoN) and the United States Marine 

Corps (USMC), with the cooperation of 

the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 

intends to prepare a Legislative 

Environmental Impact Statement 

(L–EIS) and conduct public scoping 

meetings for the proposed extension of 

the withdrawal of approximately 

226,711 acres of public land in Imperial 

and Riverside counties, California, for 

continued military use of the Chocolate 

Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range 

(CMAGR). 

The California Military Lands 

Withdrawal and Overflights Act of 1994 

(Pub. L. 103–433) withdrew 226,711 

acres of public land to DoN, reserving 

these lands for defense-related purposes 

for a period of 20 years (until October 

31, 2014). The Act provides that the 

DoN may seek extension of the CMAGR 

withdrawal. As part of the withdrawal 

process, the Secretary of the Navy is 

required to publish a Draft L–EIS 

addressing legislative alternatives and 

the effects of continued withdrawal. The 

CMAGR Draft L–EIS will evaluate the 

environmental effects of the proposal to 

extend the land withdrawal for an 

additional 25 years (through 2039) and 

will evaluate alternative actions to 

restructure the existing range boundary 

for improved efficiency in the 

management of the CMAGR and 

adjacent lands. 

DATES AND ADDRESSES: DoN is initiating 

a 90-day public scoping process to 

identify community interests and 

specific issues to be addressed in the 

L–EIS, which starts with the publication 

of this Notice of Intent (NOI). Four 

public scoping meetings have been 

scheduled to enlist written and oral 

comments regarding the scope of the 

Draft L–EIS analysis: 

1. Monday, December 6, 2010, 5:30 

p.m. to 8 p.m., Yuma County Library, 

Rooms B–C, 2951 S. 21st Drive, Yuma, 

Arizona 85364; 

2. Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 5:30 

p.m. to 8 p.m., Holiday Inn Express—El 

Centro, Conference Room B, 350 

Smoketree Drive, El Centro, California 

92243; 

3. Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 5:30 

p.m. to 8 p.m., Holiday Inn, 1800 E. 

Palm Canyon, Palm Springs, California 

92264; and 

4. Thursday, December 9, 2010, 5:30 

p.m. to 8 p.m., San Diego Planning 

Commission Hearing Room, 5201 Ruffin 

Road, Suite B, San Diego, California 

92123. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

CMAGR L–EIS Project Manager (Attn: 

Kelly Finn), NAVFAC Southwest, 1220 

Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 92132– 

5190; phone 619–532–4452. Additional 

supplementary information regarding 

the CMAGR Draft L–EIS is available at 

http:// 

www.chocolatemountainrenewal.com. 

Please submit requests for special 

assistance, sign language interpretation 

for the hearing impaired, or other 

auxiliary aids needed at the scoping 

meeting to the L–EIS Project Manager by 

November 26, 2010. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public 

scoping meeting schedules and 

locations will also be published in local 

newspapers. The public is invited to 

attend these meetings to view projectrelated displays, speak with DoN and 

USMC representatives, and submit 

public comment forms at information 

stations. A court reporter will be 

available at the meetings to accept oral 

comments. The scoping meetings will 

be conducted in an informal, open 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2010 / Notices 58371 

house style meeting format. All 

comments regarding the scope of issues 

that should be considered in the Draft 

L–EIS must be received within 90 days 

of the publication date of this notice to 

ensure full consideration in the Draft 

L–EIS analysis. 

Submitting Comments: Federal, state, 

and local agencies and interested parties 

are encouraged to provide oral and/or 

written comments regarding the scope 

of the L–EIS, reasonable alternatives 

and/or specific issues or topics of 

interest to the public. Comments may be 

submitted by: (1) Attending one of the 

public scoping open houses and 

providing oral or written comments, (2) 

submitting a comment form on the 

project’s public website at http:// 

www.chocolatemountainrenewal.com, 

or (3) mail. Written comments should be 

submitted to the L–EIS Project Manager 

listed below under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. All written 

comments on the scope of the L–EIS 

should be submitted and/or postmarked 

no later than December 23, 2010. 

The USMC will consider all 

comments received during the scoping 

period. A mailing list has been 

assembled to facilitate preparation of 

the L–EIS. Those on this list will receive 

notices and information related to L–EIS 

preparation. This list includes local, 

state, and federal agencies with 

jurisdiction or other interests in the 

alternatives. In addition, the mailing list 

includes affected municipalities and 

other interested parties. Anyone 

wishing to be added to the mailing list 

may request to be added by contacting 

the L–EIS project manager at the address 

provided below. 

Before including your address, 

telephone number, email address, or 

other personal identifying information 

in your comment, please be aware that 

your entire comment—including any 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

Although requests can be made to 

withhold personal identifying 

information from public review, it may 

not be possible to keep this information 

from disclosure. 

The CMAGR has served as an aerial 

bombing and gunnery training range 

since the 1940s. The CMAGR currently 

provides more than 700 square miles 

(459,000 acres) of land, and overlying 

and adjacent special-use airspace that 

extends laterally for several thousands 

of square miles that, among other 

activities, supports training in air 

combat maneuvering and tactics; close 

air support (where air-to-ground 

ordnance is fired to directly support 

friendly forces engaged in ground 

combat); airborne laser system 

operations; air-to-air gunnery; and airto-ground bombing, rocketry, and 

strafing. Artillery, demolitions, small 

arms, and Navy Special Warfare training 

are also conducted within the range. 

The CMAGR is a centerpiece in a much 

larger training complex that 

incorporates adjacent and nearby 

special use airspaces and ranges to 

support full-spectrum combat 

operations so that Marines can 

realistically train as they will fight. 

Purpose and Need: The purpose of 

and need for the proposed CMAGR 

renewal is for the DoN to retain a 

military aircrew training range for nearand long-term preparedness of United 

States tactical air forces. Extending the 

land withdrawal will provide for the 

continued effective implementation of 

ongoing aircrew training while 

maintaining the flexibility to adapt to 

the training needs of new technologies 

as they develop. The performance of air 

operations in combat is directly related 

to the quality and depth of training. The 

CMAGR provides a unique combination 

of attributes that serve this training 

requirement, including the favorable 

location and flying weather; sufficient 

land and airspace; diverse terrain; and 

developed training support facilities. 

The CMAGR consists of 

approximately 459,000 acres of desert 

mountain terrain in Imperial and 

Riverside counties, California. The land 

jurisdiction map of the CMAGR closely 

resembles a checkerboard where every 

other section (640 acres or 1 square 

mile) is managed by either the DoN or 

the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). 

The DoN owns 232,116 acres of the 

checkerboard, while the alternate 

sections of the range (226,711 acres) are 

made up of withdrawn lands managed 

by the BLM. 

Since the CMAGR comprises DoNowned and BLM-managed public lands, 

environmental stewardship for the 

CMAGR is implemented through the 

Sikes Act for DoN land and the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act for 

BLM land. Because the management 

goals and procedures of these acts differ, 

two separate regulatory schemes are 

required to administer the checkerboard 

land jurisdiction pattern of the range. 

Currently, DoN has full administrative 

jurisdiction to manage military training 

and resource management on DoNowned lands within the CMAGR, and 

the BLM is responsible for resource 

management on the alternating sections 

of public lands withdrawn and reserved 

for DoN use. 

Preliminary Alternatives: A range of 

alternatives, including the no-action 

alternative required by NEPA, will be 

considered. The L–EIS will also 

consider other reasonable alternatives 

that are identified during scoping or the 

preparation of the L–EIS. Four 

preliminary action alternatives have 

been identified. Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 

would include restructuring the 

CMAGR boundaries to more closely 

follow certain prominent geographic 

features, such as aligning part of the 

CMAGR boundary to closely parallel but 

no longer cross features such as the 

Bradshaw Trail and Coachella Canal. 

1. Alternative 1 would extend the 

current withdrawal with no boundary or 

jurisdictional changes, for a period of 25 

years. 

2. Alternative 2 would extend the 

land withdrawal for a period of 25 years 

with restructured boundaries and would 

allocate full administrative jurisdiction 

for resource management to DoN, in 

addition to the military activities. 

3. Alternative 3 would extend the 

land withdrawal for a period of 25 years 

and transfer all custody and 

accountability for the real property 

within both the current withdrawal and 

the restructured boundaries from BLM 

to DoN. All responsibility for resource 

management and use of the lands would 

then reside with DoN. 

4. Alternative 4 would extend the 

land withdrawal for a period of 25 years 

with the restructured boundaries; 

management of the military activities 

would remain with DoN and the 

resource management would remain 

with BLM. 

5. Under Alternative 5, the No Action 

Alternative, the existing land 

withdrawal for the CMAGR, provided 

by the California Military Lands 

Withdrawal and Overflights Act of 1994, 

would expire. The capability to support 

existing and future training activities at 

the CMAGR that rely on these lands 

would cease. No alternative range is 

located in the operational region that 

has the weapons training capacity of the 

CMAGR. Consequently, aircrew and 

other training terminated at the CMAGR 

by the No Action Alternative would 

have to be relocated to ranges elsewhere 

in the country or curtailed. Range cleanup operations at CMAGR would be 

required. 

Environmental Issues and Resources 

To Be Examined: The Draft L–EIS will 

evaluate the potential environmental 

effects associated with each of the above 

alternatives and any additional 

alternatives developed during the 

scoping period. Issues to be addressed 

include, but are not limited to, 

biological resources, cultural resources, 

geology and soils, hydrology, noise, air 

quality, safety, hazardous materials and 

waste, socioeconomics and 

environmental justice. Relevant and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
58372 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 185 / Friday, September 24, 2010 / Notices 

reasonable measures that would avoid 

or mitigate environmental effects will 

also be analyzed. Additionally, the 

USMC will undertake any consultations 

required by the Endangered Species Act, 

Clean Water Act, National Historic 

Preservation Act, and any other 

applicable law or regulation. 

In accordance with the Engle Act of 

1958, and the Federal Lands Policy and 

Management Act of 1976, the DoN is 

required to file an application with the 

BLM requesting the Secretary of the 

Interior process a proposed legislative 

withdrawal and reservation of public 

land to continue military training 

exercises at the CMAGR. The proposed 

alternatives would withdraw at least 

222,041 but not more than 242,058 acres 

of public land. As a result of the 

proposed boundary restructuring, 

approximately 15,347 acres of public 

land not in the existing 226,711 acre 

withdrawal would be withdrawn. The 

restructured boundary would offer the 

best opportunities to define and manage 

a secure boundary for the CMAGR, 

safeguard public use of adjacent public 

land, and consolidate holdings for more 

efficient environmental stewardship. 

The public land would be withdrawn 

from all forms of appropriation under 

the public land laws, including surface 

entry, mining, mineral leasing, and the 

Materials Act of 1947. 

L–EIS Schedule: This notice is the 

first phase of the L–EIS process and 

announces the 90-day public comment 

period and public scoping meetings to 

identify community concerns and local 

issues that should be addressed in the 

L–EIS. The next phase occurs when a 

Notice of Availability (NOA) is 

published in the Federal Register and 

local media to publicly announce the 

release of the Draft L–EIS. A minimum 

45-day public comment period for the 

Draft L–EIS will commence upon 

publication of the NOA in the Federal 

Register. The USMC will consider and 

respond to all comments received on the 

Draft L–EIS when preparing the Final L– 

EIS. After publication of the Draft L– 

EIS, one or more public hearings will be 

held, and public notice will be given 

regarding the time and place of the 

hearing(s). The Draft L–EIS will be 

available for public and agency review 

and comment before the public 

hearing(s). 

Dated: September 17, 2010. 

D.J. Werner, 

Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge 

Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Federal 

Register Liaison Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2010–23984 Filed 9–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Notice of Intent To Prepare an 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Skokomish General Investigation 

Study, Mason County, WA 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended, the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 

will prepare an Integrated Feasibility 

Report/Environmental Impact Statement 

(FR/EIS) for proposed ecosystem 

restoration and flood risk management 

in the Skokomish River Basin which 

empties into Hood Canal, near Shelton, 

Washington. The Skokomish Indian 

Tribe and Mason County are the nonFederal sponsors for the project. 

The Skokomish River General 

Investigation (GI) Feasibility Study for 

the Skokomish River Basin is being 

conducted under the authority of 

Section 209 of the Flood Control Act of 

1962 (Pub. L. 87–874). 

The Skokomish River channel has 

been filling with sediment for several 

decades, resulting in frequent flooding 

and decreasing natural ecosystem 

structures, functions, and processes 

necessary to support critical fish and 

wildlife habitat throughout the 

Skokomish River Basin. Increased 

sediment load, reduced flows, and 

encroachment of the floodplain by manmade structures are leading to 

continued degradation of natural 

ecosystem functions and habitat. The 

degraded riverine and estuarine aquatic 

habitat has caused a decline in the 

population of critical fish and wildlife 

species, including multiple ESA listed 

species. Additionally, the channel 

capacity of the Skokomish River varies 

significantly. Limited channel capacity 

causes floodwater to leave the banks at 

various locations, ultimately causing 

frequent flooding of local roads, two 

state highways, agricultural fields, 

residences, and other structures. 

The Skokomish River GI is a basinwide study; however, work by others, 

constrain the limit of Corps’ 

involvement to actions primarily in the 

lower Skokomish River Valley. 

Problems, opportunities, and objectives 

will be examined within the context of 

the entire watershed. Recognizing the 

relationships between the upper and 

lower watershed will ensure a 

comprehensive study overview. 

The purpose of the FR/EIS and 

feasibility study is to evaluate if there is 

a federal interest in aquatic ecosystem 

restoration and flood risk management 

in the Skokomish River Basin. 

DATES: Submit comments by October 25, 

2010 on the scope of issues to be 

addressed in the draft FR/EIS. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments 

concerning this notice to Mr. Patrick 

Cagney, Environmental Resources 

Section, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Seattle District, P.O. Box 3755, Seattle, 

WA 98124–3755. Submit electronic 

comments and supporting data to 

patrick.t.cagney@usace.army.mil 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions regarding the scoping process 

or preparation of the draft EIS may be 

directed to Mr. Patrick Cagney, 

telephone (206) 764–3654, e-mail 

patrick.t.cagney@usace.army.mil 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. Study Area: The Skokomish River 

Basin (Basin) is located in northwest 

Washington, predominantly in Mason 

County. The project study area is 

comprised of the entire drainage basin, 

including the estuary at Annas Bay. The 

river collects drainage from an 

approximate 240 square mile drainage 

basin, and eventually flows into 

southern Hood Canal, an arm of Puget 

Sound. The river flows out of three subbasins (South Fork, North Fork, and 

Vance Creek) into a broad, flat alluvial 

plain known as the Skokomish River 

Valley. The Skokomish Indian 

Reservation is located within the lower 

valley and extends along the southeast 

portion of the Olympic Peninsula. The 

Basin is defined by the Water Resource 

Inventory Area (WRIA) 16 and is located 

within U.S. Congressional District #6 of 

Washington State. 

2. Alternatives: The EIS will 

separately evaluate alternatives for 

aquatic ecosystem restoration and flood 

risk management. Alternatives that will 

be evaluated under aquatic ecosystem 

restoration will include an alternative 

that uses physical actions to restore the 

Basin’s habitat-forming processes and/or 

create habitats that have been lost as a 

result of historic alterations. Example of 

actions that could occur under this 

alternative include: increasing 

floodplain habitat and connectivity, 

restoring off-channel habitat for juvenile 

fish, improving estuarine functions and 

processes, and increasing emergent and 

riparian vegetation. Another alternative 

that will be considered will focus on 

benefits to the several aquatic species 

listed under the Endangered Species 

Act. Actions under this alternative 

could include creation of spawning and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES