[Federal Register: November 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 230)]
[Notices]
[Page 72455-72458]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28no08-50]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Corps of Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Joint Feasibility Study/Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Los Angeles River
Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study, Los Angeles County, CA
AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Amendment to notice of intent/notice of preparation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District
(Corps), and the City of Los Angeles amend the notice published in the
Federal Register on February 6, 2006 (71 FR 6058), which announced the
Corps' intent to prepare a Programmatic Draft Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Los Angeles River
Ecosystem Restoration Study, Los Angeles County, CA. This amendment to
the notice revises the February 6, 2006 notice to announce the Corps'
intent to prepare a joint Feasibility Study/Environmental Impact
Statement/Environmental Impact Report (FS/EIS/EIR) for the Los Angeles
River Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study that will identify and
evaluate site specific opportunities for ecosystem restoration. The
study proposes to consider a range of activities to restore riparian
and aquatic habitat, and related habitat functions, in and adjacent to
the Los Angeles River, which will benefit wildlife and sensitive
species.
DATES: Submit comments on or before December 29, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Ms. Tiffany Bostwick, Environmental Coordinator, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, Planning Division, CESPL-PD-
RN, 915 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tiffany Bostwick, Environmental
Coordinator, (213) 452-3845, or e-mail at
Tiffany.R.Kayama@usace.army.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Authorization. The proposed feasibility study was authorized
under Congressional Resolution, which reads as follows:
Senate Resolution, approved 25 June 1969, reading in part:
``Resolved by the Committee on Public Works of the United States
Senate, that the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors, created
under Section 3 of the River and Harbor Act, approved June 13, 1902,
be, and is hereby requested to review the report of the Chief of
Engineers on the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers and Ballona
Creek, California, published as House Document Numbered 838,
Seventy-sixth Congress, and other pertinent reports, with a view to
determining whether any modifications contained herein are advisable
at the present time, in the resources in the Los Angeles County
Drainage Area.''
2. Background. Historically, the Los Angeles River is subject to
flooding and two of the largest floods in recorded history occurred in
the 1930s, causing both a substantial loss of life and property damage.
During the latter 1930s and 1940s the Federal Government (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers) constructed the concrete flood control channel in
the Los Angeles River to expedite movement of stormwater flows to the
ocean for flood prevention, causing a complete loss of the natural
hydrologic and hydraulic regime and the natural riparian environment.
Development along most of the River is a mix of housing, industrial and
commercial land uses that contribute to the overall degradation of the
ecosystem. The City of Los Angeles, city residents, and other local
agencies have expressed interest and support for a feasibility study
that would evaluate the potential for restoration of the Los Angeles
River's aquatic ecosystem.
The entire Los Angeles River travels through a highly urbanized
area
[[Page 72456]]
covering a distance of 51 miles beginning at the confluence of Bell
Creek and Arroyo Calabasas Creek in the San Fernando Valley community
of Canoga Park, located approximately 32 miles northwest of downtown
Los Angeles. The River flows through San Fernando Valley and the Los
Angeles Basin, in a southeasterly direction until it empties in to the
Pacific Ocean in San Pedro.
The general project area includes approximately one-half mile on
each side of the 32-mile river corridor that begins at the confluence
near Owensmouth Avenue in Canoga Park, and continues downstream to
Washington Boulevard, near the northern boundary of the city of Vernon.
The Corps and the City of Los Angeles have prepared and published a
Programmatic Environmental Impact Report/Programmatic Environmental
Impact Statement (PEIR/PEIS, April 2007) for the Los Angeles River
Revitalization Master Plan (LARRMP). The LARRMP is intended to serve as
a blueprint for restoring some of the River's ecological functions and
toward improving the overall health of the watershed by implementing a
variety of projects, including channel modifications, improvements to
the River corridor, revitalized riverfront communities in key
opportunity areas, recreational amenities such as parks and open space,
pedestrian and bicycle trails, bridges, enhanced connector streets, and
green space networks in River adjacent neighborhoods. Implementing
LARRMP recommendations over the near-term planning period (5 to 20
years) and the long-term period (20 to 50 years) constitutes the
proposed action evaluated in the Programmatic EIR/EIS. However, since
the PEIR/PEIS did not evaluate site specific ecosystem restoration
opportunities, it will not serve as a decision document for the Corps
(i.e., result in a project action).
Although components of the LARRMP include opportunities for
restoring a more natural riverine environment along the Los Angeles
River, the FS/EIS/EIR to be prepared for the Corps' Los Angeles River
Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study will provide the necessary site
specific evaluations and detailed analysis for ecosystem restoration,
including various alternatives for restoration of riparian and aquatic
habitats and functions, and increased habitat values. The FS/EIS/EIR
will also consider the goals and objectives identified in the LARRMP
and where they might meet the requirements of the Corps of Engineers
Federal planning guidance for ecosystem restoration. The Corps is the
Lead Agency for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) for the project, and the City of Los Angeles is the Lead Agency
for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The purpose of the Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration
Feasibility Study is to consider opportunities for ecosystem
restoration along 32 miles of the river within the City of Los Angeles,
from the Canoga Park area of the northwest San Fernando Valley, to the
southwestern quadrant of Los Angeles, near the border with the City of
Vernon. The Project will identify opportunities to: (1) Evaluate and
assess the problems and needs associated with loss of riparian habitat;
(2) formulate alternative measures for environmental restoration,
develop viable alternatives, and identify the National Ecosystem
Restoration (NER) Plan, which will provide maximum ecosystem benefits;
and (3) identify opportunities for Corps involvement in restoring the
functions and values of the River's ecosystem. Secondary benefits would
include associated recreational, water quality, and community
revitalization opportunities.
3. Proposed Objectives. The following planning objectives were
identified to direct formulation and evaluation of alternative plans
that implemented within and/or adjacent to the Los Angeles River:
a. Restore riparian and aquatic habitat within the 32-mile reach of
the Los Angeles River within the City of Los Angeles, where feasible.
b. Support the restoration of more natural hydrologic processes
within significant reaches of the study area.
c. Support the restoration of habitat in reaches contiguous to
existing habitat corridors where connectivity can be reestablished.
(Note: These existing habitat corridors will be specifically identified
in later iterations of planning objectives.)
d. Support the modification of hydrology and stream hydraulics to
maximize infiltration and inflow, decrease peak discharges, and
identify storage where available.
e. Provide recreation where appropriate along the 32-mile river
corridor.
The Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration Study is being
conducted in a watershed context. While not a watershed study, this
Feasibility Study is attempting to identify opportunities to engage in
collaborative efforts with others who are addressing ecosystem
restoration and other related water resources needs within the
watershed. Planning objectives that could be affected by collaborative
efforts within the watershed include:
a. Identify opportunities to store or redirect flood waters within
the watershed to reduce water surface elevations and support the
reestablishment of baseflow within the mainstem;
b. Identify opportunities to reestablish riparian corridors on
tributary streams and to link sites to mainstem restoration sites;
c. Identify areas for open space and recreation;
d. Identify opportunities for groundwater recharge;
e. Identify opportunities for water quality treatment/enhancement
of mainstem inflows.
4. Planning Constraints. Consistent with these planning objectives,
the Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration Study will be formulated in
recognition of a variety of planning constraints, which include:
a. Restoration alternatives cannot degrade the existing Corps flood
risk management project.
b. Velocity reductions in the main river channel must be offset
with measures that will provide additional flood storage capacity or
the means to reduce flood flows to a level that will allow for riparian
and/or aquatic restoration.
c. The highly urbanized nature of the floodplain, competing land
uses, and Corps policies limiting land acquisition costs (as a
percentage of total project costs) will constrain the opportunities for
acquisition of additional lands for floodplain restoration. Potential
restoration locations will need to be identified opportunistically,
based in large part on the availability of lands and the ability to
acquire significantly sized parcels of floodplain lands.
d. Existing infrastructure (roads, highways, utilities) adjacent to
the waterway limits the physical extent of restoration activities.
e. Potential restoration sites with unresolved hazardous, toxic and
radioactive waste (HTRW) problems would be avoided.
f. Public safety is primary concern for persons living adjacent to
the Los Angeles River.
g. Avoid conflicts with other legitimate uses of re-developable
floodplain lands (e.g., active recreation).
Based on the objectives and constraints, the FS/EIS/EIR would
evaluate potential alternatives, including the proposed action and the
no action alternative, and associated impacts for environmental
resources (beneficial and adverse) on the
[[Page 72457]]
environment along the 32-mile river corridor.
5. Alternatives. The FS/EIS/EIR will consider a range of viable
alternatives and their impacts, including the No Action Alternative.
The range of viable alternatives may include a locally preferred
alternative or features that are improvements or measures desired by
the project non-Federal sponsor (City of Los Angeles) that is not part
of the Federal project. The Scoping will be an early and open process
designed to determine the issues and alternatives to be addressed in
the Report. Four initial sites within the general study area have been
identified by the City and Corps:
Portions of the Los Angeles State Historic Park.
Glendale Narrows/Taylor Yard Reach.
Sepulveda Basin.
Reseda Park.
These initial sites appear to have the greatest likelihood at this
time to be readily-implementable, where alternative plans could be
developed and implemented to meet the study's purposes. Additional
sites may be identified during the scoping process and development of
the draft FS/EIS/EIR. A range of alternatives will be developed for the
sites identified and may include (but not be limited to) the following
features or measures as applicable for each site:
Water Storage.
Widen Channel.
Offline Channel.
Create Pervious Surfaces in Watersheds.
Tributary Reconfiguration/Restoration.
Remove Concrete.
Reconfigure Concrete.
Connect Riparian Corridors to Existing Corridors.
Create Riparian Corridors to Woodlands.
Daylight Outfalls.
In-channel Vegetation.
Habitat Wetlands.
Water Treatment Wetlands.
Bio-engineering Channel Walls.
Real Estate Acquisition (non-structural measure).
Local Water Conservation Program.
Community Education Programs.
Establish Community Programs.
Habitat Management Plan.
6. Content of the Report. The FS/EIS/EIR will identify the
anticipated effects of the project alternatives (negative and
beneficial) and describe and analyze direct, indirect, and cumulative
potential environmental impacts of the project alternatives, including
the No Action Alternative, in accordance with NEPA (40CFR1500-1508) and
CEQA. For each issue listed below, the FS/EIS/EIR will include a
discussion of the parameters used in evaluating the impacts as well as
recommended mitigation, indicating the effectiveness of mitigation
measures proposed to be implemented and what, if any, additional
measures would be required to reduce the impacts to a less-than-
significant level. The list of issues presented below is preliminary
both in scope and number. These issues are presented to facilitate
public comment on the scope of the FS/EIS/EIR, and are not intended to
be all-inclusive or to be a predetermination of impact topics to be
considered.
Biological Resources. The Report will address the following issues
and potential detrimental and beneficial effects related to biological
resources:
Increased habitat for all organisms that use multiple
wetland and/or aquatic habitats, including birds, mammals, and fish;
Improved habitat connectivity within the riparian habitat
and adjacent upland habitats;
Effects on habitat potentially supporting populations of
endangered species and other species of concern;
Shifts in geographic distribution of populations and
effects on population sizes of migratory waterfowl and shorebirds;
Effects of flood control structures on existing ecosystem
attributes and functions including aquatic and terrestrial species; and
Effects of public access and recreation on aquatic and
terrestrial species.
Hydrology and Flood Protection. The FS/EIS/EIR will address the
following issues and potential detrimental and beneficial effects
related to hydrology and flood protection:
Existing and future without-project flood hazards;
Changes in channel geometry and characteristics as a
result of ecosystem restoration alternative measures; and
Effects on flood flow conveyance as a result of ecosystem
restoration alternative measures.
Water Quality. The Report will address the following issues and
potential detrimental and beneficial effects related to water quality:
Engineering design and techniques to improve water quality
in segments and throughout the project area;
Effects of proposed ecosystem restoration alternative
measures on base flow water quality.
Recreation and Public Access. The Report will address the effects
of ecosystem restoration alternative measures on existing recreation
facilities and their use as well as the potential effects of ecosystem
restoration measures on planned or new facilities. The benefits and
impacts of increased or decreased public access on biological resources
and achievement of other project objectives will also be addressed.
Economics. The Report will evaluate the economic effects of the
alternatives, including a cost effectiveness and incremental cost
analysis of proposed restoration features, and a benefit-cost analysis
of any flood control or recreation features.
Cumulative Impacts. The Report will examine the cumulative impacts
of past, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable future projects affecting
the Los Angeles River riparian corridor, as well as effects on adjacent
urban and rural lands and communities.
7. Environmental Analysis Process. The FS/EIS/EIR will be prepared
in compliance with NEPA and Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations, contained in 40 CFR parts 1500 -1508; and with CEQA,
Public Resources Code Sec 21000 et seq., and the State and City CEQA
Guidelines as amended. The Corps will be the Lead Agency for the NEPA
process and the City of Los Angeles will be the Lead Agency for the
CEQA process. In accordance with both CEQA and NEPA, these Lead
Agencies are responsible for the scope, content, and legal adequacy of
the document.
The scoping process will include the opportunity for public input
through written comments submitted during the 30-day scoping period. A
public scoping meeting will also be held to solicit comments on the
environmental effects of the range of potential actions and the
appropriate scope of the FS/EIS/EIR.
The draft FS/EIS/EIR will incorporate public concerns associated
with the project alternatives identified in the scoping process and
will be distributed for at least a 45-day public review and comment
period. During this time, both written and verbal comments will be
solicited on the adequacy of the document. The final FS/EIS/EIR will
address the comments received on the draft during public review and
will be made available to all commenters on the draft Report. Copies of
the draft and final reports will be posted on the Internet as part of
the public review process.
The final step in the Federal EIS process is the preparation of a
Record of Decision (ROD), a concise summary of the decisions made by
the Corps. The ROD will identify the alternative selected and other
alternatives that were considered. It also will discuss the mitigation
measures that were adopted.
[[Page 72458]]
The ROD may be published no earlier than 30 days after publication of
the Notice of Availability of the final EIS. The final step in the
State EIR process is certification of the EIR, which includes
preparation of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and adoption
of its findings, should the project be approved.
8. Scoping Process. 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 is important in defining the scope of analysis in the FS/
EIS/EIR, identifying significant environmental issues and impact
analysis in the FS/EIS/EIR and providing useful information such as
published and unpublished data and personal knowledge of relevant
issues.
The Corps and City of Los Angeles conducted a public scoping
meeting on April 18, 2007 for both the Feasibility Study and the LARRMP
PEIR/PEIS (2007). Public input and comments received during the scoping
meeting as well as other comments received during public outreach
efforts associated with the LARRMP will be considered during
preparation of the FS/EIS/EIR.
A second public scoping meeting will be held on December 4, 2008,
from 7--8:30 p.m. at the Metropolitan Water District, 700 North Alameda
Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012, to solicit additional comments on the
environmental effects of the range of potential actions and the
appropriate scope of the FS/EIS/EIR. The public is invited to comment
on environmental issues to be addressed in the FS/EIS/EIR during this
meeting. Public input and comments received during the scoping meeting
will be considered during preparation of the FS/EIS/EIR.
Those interested in providing written comments, 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 point of contact (see ADDRESSES).
Requests to be placed on the mailing list for announcements and the
Draft FS/EIS/EIR also should be sent to Ms. Bostwick (see ADDRESSES).
Dated: November 13, 2008.
Anthony G. Reed,
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army, Acting District Commander.
[FR Doc. E8-28275 Filed 11-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P