[Federal Register: February 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 30)]
[Notices]
[Page 7721-7723]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14fe06-18]
========================================================================
Notices
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.
========================================================================
[[Page 7721]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Tahoe National Forest; Yuba River Ranger District; California;
South Yuba Canal Maintenance Project
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest, Yuba River
Ranger District, gives notice of the Agency's intent to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to remove hazardous trees located
within approximately 150 feet of either side of the centerline of the
South Yuba Canal, within the public lands of the Tahoe National Forest.
DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received
by 30 days from the date of publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is expected
to be completed in April of 2006, and the Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) is expected to be completed in July of 2006.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to Dennis Stevens, USDA Forest
Service, Yuba River Ranger District, 15924 Highway 49, Camptonville, CA
95922, office hours 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday-Friday; telephone 530
478-6253; FAX 530 288-0727; e-mail:
comments-pacificsouthwest-tahoe-downieville@fs.fed.us.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Stevens or Patrick Farrell at
the above address and phone number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pacific Gas and Electric Company's (PG&E)
South Yuba Canal System is part of the Drum-Spaulding Hydro System
(License 2310), currently issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) through the year 2013. The South Yuba Canal System
operates primarily for the delivery of domestic and agricultural water
use within the communities of Nevada City and Grass Valley, California.
Additionally, the water delivered through the system is used to
generate electricity for the people of Northern California from the
Spaulding No. 2 and Deer Creek Powerhouses. The South Yuba Canal System
is approximately nineteen miles long and traverses both private and
National Forest Lands. Approximately 11.6 miles of the system are
located within the Yuba River Ranger District of the Tahoe National
Forest.
The Nevada Irrigation District (NID) utilizes PG&E's South Yuba
Canal to import water into the Deer Creek watershed where it becomes
the primary water supply for NID's Cascade Canal System. Approximately
97 percent of the water used in the Cascade Canal System originates
from water diverted from the South Yuba Canal. The remaining three
percent comes from natural flow within the Deer Creek drainage.
Currently, over 30,000 people are served by this canal system. Along
with the residential and agricultural use, water is also provided to
fire stations, county and city hydrant systems, schools, the Sierra
Nevada Memorial Hospital, and the USFS/CDF Emergency Command Center/
Air-Attack Base.
The Cascade Canal system supplies raw water to three of the
District's treatment plants in the areas surrounding Grass Valley and
Nevada City. There are 10,420 service connections for domestic water
from these treatment plants. There are also 1,450 service connections
for agricultural and domestic customers that are served directly from
the Cascade Canal system.
A list of routine canal maintenance work is identified by PG&E, and
except for emergencies, all work is scheduled for completion during an
annual outage. During this annual outage, the canal system is
dewatered. This allows for the entire system to be inspected in order
to plan for future work. Flume sections are checked for wood integrity,
open ditch sections are checked for deterioration and hazard trees are
identified.
The yearly outage occurs during the month of April, and is
scheduled at that time because it causes the least disruption to water
deliveries while providing a weather window to complete the work. The
annual outage is typically two weeks long, commencing around the first
of April and ending by the second week of the month. During this period
all major routine work to the canal system as well as annual
maintenance to Spaulding No. 2 and Deer Creek Powerhouses must be
accomplished.
Purpose and Need for Action
The Hydrological Division of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
requested the Tahoe National Forest consider a project proposal that
would remove trees on public land that currently threaten, or may
threaten within the foreseeable future (five to ten years), the
structural integrity of the South Yuba Canal. PG&E structural engineers
believe that a preventive maintenance strategy is needed at this time
due to the following conditions:
The winter of 2004-2005 caused significant maintenance
problems for PG&E due to tree windthrow and breakage along the canal.
Damage and repairs resulted in a disruption of flow and threatened the
supply of water to consumers.
Currently, there are numerous trees within falling
distance of the canal that, due to their physical condition and
location, pose a threat to the canal and its associated facilities.
The winter storms of 2005-2006 have already resulted in
structural damage along the canal. Blown-over, unstable trees and
snapped tree-tops from nearby trees were the primary cause of damage to
the canal.
The population residing within the local Sierra Nevada
foothill communities has more than doubled in the past 35 years and the
number of people currently living within the PG&E and NID service area
is forecasted to triple by 2040.
Millions of visitors continue to travel to western Nevada
County to enjoy aquatic recreational pursuits. Annual increases in
local residents and tourist visitor-days continue to strain the
capability of the current water supply infrastructure to meet customer
demands.
If the current annual maintenance strategy of clearing
only trees after they have caused damage continues, the results will be
continued breeches along the canal, continued disruptions in water
deliveries, and escalating maintenance costs that inevitably must be
passed along to consumers.
[[Page 7722]]
Because of the large number and various types of clientele served
by the South Yuba Canal System, there is a critical need to develop a
long-range (5-10 years) protection strategy that will better ensure the
integrity of the primary facility for delivering water to western
Nevada County residents. During the last three decades, Nevada County
has experienced a steady growth in population. This population
expansion has lead to a greater demand in maintaining a reliable water
system. Interruption of flow compromises both PG&E and NID's ability to
provide dependable service.
The greatest threat to maintaining uninterrupted flows to the South
Yuba Canal is the stands of mixed conifers and hardwoods that grow
within an approximate one hundred fifty foot strip on either side of
the canal's centerline. Due to limited accessibility and the difficulty
of removing these trees from close proximity to the canal, many trees
that currently pose a hazard to the canal have not been harvested
during past ground-based logging activities. Numerous trees within
falling distance of the canal show signs of stress, disease,
instability and damage. Many of these trees are presently growing
directly into the canal berm and have grown large enough to cause
cracking within the concrete linings. The root structures continue
growing and create pathways for water to leak through the berm,
providing a mechanism for future canal failure.
Additionally, damage to the canal's infrastructure occurs when
trees located along the canal uproot, break-off or breech the flume
during storms or high wind events. When a tree falls into a wooden
flume it will often cause major damage that results in complete
structural failure. If a tree falls into an open ditch section, it
usually will not completely destroy the berm. However, the limbs and
debris will dam the water in the canal, potentially creating an ``over-
topping'' situation. This situation can lead to a berm washout
depending upon the flows and the length of time the situation exists.
These types of incidents are often discovered by PG&E's system
operators monitoring the alarm stations.
Therefore, the primary goal of this proposal is to develop a
protection strategy along the South Yuba Canal that will reduce the
annual amount of damage to the canal's infrastructure that routinely
results in interrupted flows due to uprooting and breakage from trees
located along the canal. The intent is to provide a preventative,
longer-term (5-10 years) approach to lessen the amount and intensity of
damage to the canal.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is to remove hazardous trees located within
approximately 150 feet of either side of the centerline of the South
Yuba Canal, within the public lands of the Tahoe National Forest. Trees
within falling distance of the canal, canal maintenance structures or
canal electronic monitoring equipment that exhibit the following
characteristics will be evaluated for removal:
Dead/dying trees.
Trees and dead tops of sufficient length to pose a threat
of breakage.
Trees with significant signs of rot or decay.
Severely forked trees whose tops, boles or large limbs
encroach upon the canal.
Trees weakened by insects and disease.
Trees where the root system is sufficiently exposed to
indicate instability.
Trees where the root system is currently penetrating, or
will likely penetrate the berm or fill of the canal, thus jeopardizing
structural integrity.
Trees having a decisive lean towards the canal, canal
maintenance structures or canal electronic equipment.
The project area extends along both sides of an estimated 11.6
miles of canal located on public lands within the Tahoe National
Forest. Currently, it is estimated that maintenance tree removal would
involve a ground based harvest system on approximately 20 percent of
the project area, while the remaining 80 percent would require an
aerial harvest system.
Only trees that currently threaten, or would likely threaten the
structural integrity of the canal system over the next 5-10 years, will
be assessed for risk, be designated, and removed under this proposal.
The project area includes portions of several California spotted
owl and northern goshawk Protected Activity Centers (PACs). While the
project will be designed to minimize impacts to these species, removal
of certain hazard trees (specifically those that could cause structural
damage to the canal through felling activities) can only be done during
the annual dewatering period in April. In order to implement this
project, the responsible official may not be able to fully implement
Standard and guideline No. 75 for the California spotted owl and No. 76
for the northern goshawk, which require a limited operating period for
vegetation treatments within approximately \1/4\ mile of nest sites
during the breeding season, from March 1 through August 31 for the
California spotted owl and February 15 through September 15 for the
northern goshawk (USDAS Forest Service, Sierra Nevada Forest Plan
amendment Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Record of
Decision, 2004, p. 60). In order for this project to comply with
existing laws and regulations, it would necessitate a non-significant
amendment to the Tahoe National Forest Land Management Plan (TNFLMP),
to lift the requirement to apply Standard and Guideline Nos. 75 and 76,
for implementation of this project.
Responsible Official
The responsible Official for this decision is the forest Supervisor
of the Tahoe National Forest, Steven T. Eubanks; Tahoe National Forest
Supervisors Office, 631 Coyote Street, Nevada City, CA 95959. As the
responsible official, he will document the decision and reasons for the
decision in the Record of Decision (ROD), which will be published along
with the FEIS.
Nature of Decision To Be Made
The decision to be made is whether to implement the proposed action
as described above, to vary the location or design of the project to
meet the purpose and need while addressing issues raised in public
scoping, or to take no action at this time.
Scoping Process
Public participation is viewed as an integral part of the
environmental analysis. The Forest Service will be seeking points of
dispute, disagreement or debate from Federal, State, and local
governmental agencies as well as from individuals or organizations that
may be potentially interested or affected by the proposed action. A
scoping letter will be mailed to persons who have expressed interest in
the proposed action based on notifications in the Tahoe National Forest
Quarterly Schedule of Proposed actions and by notification through a
published legal notice in Grass Valley's The Union (the newspaper of
record for this project), Grass Valley, California. In addition,
adjacent land owners will be mailed scoping letters.
Comment Requested
This notice of intent initiates the scoping process which guides
the development of the environmental impact statement. Comments
submitted during the scoping process should be in
[[Page 7723]]
writing or e-mail, and should be specific to the proposed action. The
comments should describe as clearly and completely as possible any
points of dispute, debate or disagreement the commenter has with the
proposal. Once scoping letters are received, the District shall
identify all potential issues, eliminate non-significant issues or
those covered by another environmental analysis, identify significant
issues to analyze in depth, develop additional alternatives to address
those significant issues, and identify potential environmental effects
of the proposed action as well as all fully analyzed alternatives.
Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent
Environmental Review
A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for
comment. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement
will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency
publishes the notice of availability in the Federal Register.
The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important
to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public
participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of
draft environmental impact statements must structure their
participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that it is
meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and
contentions. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,
553 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the
draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised
until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may
be waived or dismissed by the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 F.2d
1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490
F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). Because of these court rulings,
it is very important that those interested in this proposed action
participate by the close of the 45-day comment period so that
substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest
Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to
them in the final environmental impact statement.
To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues
and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft
environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is
also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the
draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft
environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives
formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer
to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at
40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points.
Comments received, including the names and addresses of those who
comment, will be considered part of the public record on this proposal
and will be available for public inspection.
(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook
1909.15, Section 21)
Dated: February 7, 2006.
Steven T. Eubanks,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 06-1346 Filed 2-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M