Changes in Mammoth Creek Minimum Streamflow Requirements and Point of Measurement, and Changes in Place of Use

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service

Changes in Mammoth Creek Minimum Streamflow Requirements and

Point of Measurement, and Changes in Place of Use

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, will prepare an

environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed amendment to the

existing Master Operating Agreement establishing minimum streamflow

requirements for Mammoth Creek, and Point of Measurement. The Forest

Service, Inyo National Forest, Mono County, California, is acting as

joint lead agency on the project, together with the

[[Page 14667]]

Mammoth Community Water District (District). Under the California

Environmental Quality Act, the District must conduct its own

environmental assessment, and has determined that an Environmental

Impact Report (EIR) is required. In accordance with Federal and State

regulations, a joint EIR/RIS will be prepared. The agency gives notice

of the environmental analysis and decision making processes that will

occur on the proposal so that interested and affected people are aware

of how they may participate and contribute to the final decision.

DATES: Comments regarding the scope of the analysis must be received by

April 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments and suggestions concerning the

proposed action to the responsible official, Dennis Martin, Forest

Supervisor, Inyo National Forest, 873 North Main Street, Bishop,

California 93154, Attn. MCWD EIR/EIS.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Direct questions about this

environmental impact statement to Thom Heller, Special Use Permit

Administrator, Inyo National Forest, P.O. Box 148, Mammoth Lakes,

California 93546, or telephone (619) 924-5513.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proposed action consists of two specific

components: 1) a change in the minimum streamflow requirements for

Mammoth Creek and the point of measurement, and 2) a change in the

District's authorized Place of Use (POU) for Mammoth Creek water. The

change in minimum streamflow requirements and point of measurement

result in both state and federal actions that require CEQA and NEPA

documentation. Although addressed in the joint EIR/EIS, the change in

the POU is a state action only, and not subject to NEPA. Three

alternatives are currently being considered: changing the minimum

streamflow requirements to the schedule shown on Table 2 (Proposed

action); changing the minimum streamflow requirements to an

alternative, three-flow schedule; and not changing the minimum

streamflow requirements (no action).

Public participation will be specially important at several points

during the analysis. The first point is the scoping process (40 CFR

1501.7). The Forest Service has and is seeking information, comments,

and assistance from Federal, State, and local agencies and other

individuals or organizations who may be interested in or affected by

the proposed action. This input will be used in preparation of the

draft EIR/EIS. The scoping process includes:

1. Identifying potential issues.

2. Identifying issues to be analyzed in depth

3. Eliminating insignificant issues or those which have been

covered by a relevant previous environmental analysis.

4. Exploring additional alternatives.

5. Identifying potential environmental effects of the proposed

action and alternatives (e.g., direct, indirect, and cumulative effects

and connected actions).

6. Determining potential cooperating agencies and task assignments.

Mailings to individuals and agencies that participate in the above

planning efforts will provide them with information about the proposed

project. Public meetings, if held, will be announced locally. Federal,

State, and local agencies, user groups and other organizations who

would be interested in the study will be invited to participate in

scoping the issues that should be considered.

The draft EIR/EIS is scheduled to be completed by September, 1997.

The comment period on this draft EIR/EIS will be 45 days from the date

the Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability appears in

the Federal Register. It is very important that those interested in the

proposed action participate at that time.

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 proposed action 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 (1978). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the

draft EIR/EIS stage but that are not raised until after completion of

the final EIR/EIS 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 EIR/EIS.

To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues

and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft EIR/EIS

should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer

to specific pages or chapters of the draft document. Comments may also

address the adequacy of the draft EIR/EIS or the merits of the

alternatives formulated and discussed in the document. 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.

After the comment period ends on the draft EIR/EIS, the comments

will be analyzed and considered by the Forest Service in preparing the

final EIR/EIS, which is expected to be completed by December, 1997. The

Forest Service is required to respond in the final EIS to the comments

received (40 CFR 1503.4). The responsible official will consider the

comments, responses, and environmental consequences discussed in the

final EIS and applicable laws, regulations, and policies in making his

decision on the proposal.

The decision will either be approval of the proposed action as

submitted, approval of the proposed action as modified, or denial of

the proposed action (No. Action). If the proposal is approved, the

existing Memorandum of Agreement would be modified and the revised

minimum flow requirements for Mammoth Creek would be approved. The

responsible official will document the decision and rationale in the

Record of Decision. The decision will be subject to appeal under 36 CFR

215 or regulations applicable at the time of the decision.

Dated: March 21, 1997.

Dennis W. Martin,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 97-7773 Filed 3-26-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M