![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: December 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 245)]
[Notices]
[Page 76633-76634]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21de06-24]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration Project, Barnstable County,
MA; Record of Decision
1. Purpose--As State conservationist for the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), I am the Responsible Federal Official
(RFO) for all NRCS projects in Massachusetts.
The recommended plan for the Cape Cod Watershed involves works of
improvement to be installed under authorities administered by NRCS.
This areawide planning Project \1\ includes 26 salt marsh restoration
projects, 24 fish passage remediation projects, and 26 stormwater
remediation projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We use ``Project'' in this ROD and the Plan-EIS to refer to
the areawide Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration Project and
``project'' to refer to individual site restoration or remediation
activities; the Project comprises 76 projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cape Cod Watershed plan was prepared under the authority of the
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566, 83rd
Congress, 68 Stat. 666, as amended) by the Cape Cod Conservation
District, Barnstable County Commissioners, the 15 towns of Barnstable
County, and the Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental
Affairs. The scoping meeting, held during May 2005, established the
NRCS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, as lead agency.
2. Measures taken to comply with national environmental policies--
The Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration Project has been planned in
accordance with existing Federal legislation concerned with the
preservation of environmental values. The following actions were taken
to ensure that the Cape Cod Watershed plan is consistent with national
goals and policies.
The interdisciplinary environmental evaluation of the Cape Cod
Water Resources Restoration Project was conducted by the sponsoring
local organizations, cooperating agencies, and the NRCS. Information
was obtained from many groups and agencies. An inventory and evaluation
of environmental and socioeconomic conditions were prepared by
Massachusetts NRCS and EA Engineering, Science, and Technology under a
contract with NRCS. Reviews were held with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Park
Service, Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, State
Historic Preservation Officer, and the Tribal Historic Preservation
Officer of the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah). Inputs from
these reviews were included in the EIS.
A public meeting was held on May 18, 2005, to solicit public
participation in the environmental evaluation, to assure that all
interested parties had sufficient information to understand how their
concerns are affected by water resource problems, to afford local
interests the opportunity to express their views regarding the plans
that can best solve these problems, and to provide all interests an
opportunity to participate in the plan selection. More than 400 parties
were notified by mail of the joint public meetings. Meeting notes are
on file at the NRCS State Office.
Testimony and recommendations were received relative to the
following subjects:
a. Support for projects to treat stormwater runoff as a means for
improving water quality and keeping shellfish beds open for
recreational and commercial use.
b. Support for projects to restore fish passageways on local streams.
c. Support for projects to restore tidal flushing to salt marshes
with restricted tidal openings.
A draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was prepared in August
2006 and made available for public review. The recommendations and
comments obtained from the public meeting held during Project planning
and assessment were considered in the preparation of the draft EIS.
The draft EIS was distributed to agencies, conservation groups,
organizations, and individuals for comment. Copies were also placed in
the libraries of all 15 towns in the watershed, and the draft EIS was
made available on the Massachusetts NRCS Web site. The draft EIS was
filed with the Environmental Protection Agency on August 3, 2006, and
notices of the availability of the draft EIS for public review were
published in the Federal Register by NRCS on August 1, 2006, and by EPA
on August 11, 2006.
[[Page 76634]]
Existing data and information pertaining to the Project's probable
environmental consequences were obtained with assistance from other
scientists and engineers. Documentary information as well as the views
of interested Federal, State, and local agencies and concerned
individuals and organizations having special knowledge of, competence
over, or interest in the Project's environmental impacts were sought.
This process continued until it was felt that all the information
necessary for a comprehensive, reliable assessment had been gathered.
A complete picture of the Project's current and probable future
environmental setting was assembled to determine the proposed Project's
impact and identify unavoidable adverse environmental impacts that
might be produced. During these phases of evaluation, it became
apparent that there are legitimate conflicts of scientific theory and
conclusions leading to differing views of the Project's environmental
impact. In such cases, after consulting with persons qualified in the
appropriate disciplines, those theories and conclusions appearing to be
the most reasonable, and having scientific acceptance were adopted.
The consequences of a full range of reasonable and viable
alternatives to specific improvements were considered, studied, and
analyzed. In reviewing these alternatives, all courses of action that
could reasonably accomplish the Project purposes were considered.
Attempts were made to identify the economic, social, and environmental
values affected by each alternative. Both structural and nonstructural
alternatives were considered.
The alternatives considered reasonable alternatives to accomplish
the project's objectives were (1) Water Resources Restoration
Alternative, (2) No Action Alternative.
3. Conclusions--The following conclusions were reached after
carefully reviewing the proposed Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration
Project in light of all national goals and policies, particularly those
expressed in the National Environmental Policy Act, and after
evaluating the overall merit of possible alternatives to the Project:
a. The Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration Project will employ
reasonable and practicable means that are consistent with the National
Environmental Policy Act while permitting the application of other
national policies and interests. These means include, but are not
limited to, a Project planned and designed to minimize adverse effects
on the natural environment while accomplishing an authorized Project
purpose. Project features designed to preserve existing environmental
values for future generations include: (1) Replacement of inadequately
sized or failed culverts with larger culverts or bridges to restore
tidal flushing to salt marshes; (2) reconstruction of failed fish
passageways, replacement of collapsed or improperly aligned curves, or
removing restrictions at bridges to provide full access to upstream
spawning and nursery areas for anadromous fish; and (3) installation of
catch basins and infiltration systems or other cost-effective
alternatives to treat stormwater runoff, reduce bacteria loading to
tidal receiving waters, and help keep shellfish beds open.
b. The Cape Cod Water Resources Restoration Project was planned
using a systematic interdisciplinary approach involving integrated uses
of the natural and social sciences and environmental design arts. All
conclusions concerning the environmental impact of the Project and
overall merit of existing plans were based on a review of data and
information that would be reasonably expected to reveal significant
environmental consequences of the proposed Project. These data included
studies prepared specifically for the Project and comments and views of
all interested Federal, State, and local agencies and individuals. The
results of this review constitute the basis for the conclusions and
recommendations. The Project will not affect any cultural resources
eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. Nor
will the Project affect any species of fish, wildlife, or plant or
their habitats that have been designated as endangered or threatened.
c. In studying and evaluating the environmental impact of the Cape
Cod Water Resources Restoration Project, every effort was made to
express all significant environmental values quantitatively and to
identify and give appropriate weight and consideration of
nonquantifiable environmental values.
d. Wherever legitimate conflicts of scientific theory and
conclusions existed and conclusions led to different views, persons
qualified in the appropriate environmental disciplines were consulted.
Theories and conclusions appearing to be most reasonable scientifically
acceptable, or both, were adopted.
e. Every possible effort has been made to identify those adverse
environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the Project is constructed.
f. The long-term and short-term resource uses, long-term
productivity, and the irreversible and irretrievable commitment of
resources are described in the final EIS.
g. All reasonable and viable alternatives to Project features and
to the Project itself were studied and analyzed with reference to
national policies and goals, especially those expressed in the National
Environmental Policy Act and the Federal water resource development
legislation under which the Project was planned. Each possible course
of action was evaluated as to its possible economic, technical, social,
and overall environmental consequences to determine the tradeoffs
necessary to accommodate all national policies and interests. Some
alternatives may tend to protect more of the present and tangible
environmental amenities than the proposed Project will preserve.
However, no alternative or combination of alternatives will afford
greater protection of the environmental values while accomplishing the
other Project goals and objectives.
h. I conclude, therefore, that the proposed Project will be the
most effective means of meeting national goals and is consistent in
serving the public interest by including provisions to protect and
enhance the environment. I also conclude that the recommended plan is
the environmentally preferable plan.
4. Recommendations--Having concluded that the proposed Cape Cod
Water Resources Restoration Project uses all practicable means,
consistent with other essential considerations of the national policy,
to meet the goals established in the National Environmental Policy Act,
that the Project will thus serve the overall public interest, that the
final EIS has been prepared, reviewed, and accepted in accordance with
the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act as implemented
by Departmental regulations for the preparation of environmental impact
statements, and that the Project meets the needs of the Project's
sponsoring local organizations, I propose to implement the Cape Cod
Water Resources Restoration Project.
Christine Clarke,
State Conservationist, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture.
[FR Doc. E6-21847 Filed 12-20-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-P