[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 162 (Friday, August 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44947-44948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22541]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration


Environmental Impact Statement: Monterey County, California

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: The FHWA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a 
supplement to a final environmental impact statement will be prepared 
for a proposed highway project in Monterey County, California.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John R. Schultz, Chief, District Operations North, Federal Highway 
Administration, 980 Ninth Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, California, 
95814-2724; telephone: (916) 498-5041.


[[Page 44948]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FHWA, in cooperation with the California 
Department of Transportation (Caltrans), will prepare a supplement to 
the final Environmental Impact Statement-Report (EIS/R) on a proposal 
to improve State Route (SR) 1 in Monterey County, California. The 
original final EIS/R for the improvements (FHWA-CA-EIS-86-05-F) was 
approved on October 2, 1991. The project study limits of alternatives 
considered in the final EIS/R extended from 0.28 miles south of the 
Carmel River to 0.1 mile south of the Route 1/68 interchange, a 
distance of 3.1 miles.
    The preferred alternative, identified in the final EIS/R and 
selected in the Record of Decision signed on November 14, 1991, is 
known as Alternative 1C Modified. Alternative 1C Modified provides a 
four-lane divided freeway on a new alignment through Hatton Canyon from 
Carmel Valley Road to the existing freeway interchange at Carmel Hill 
(State Route 1/68). A two-lane conventional highway will cross the 
Carmel River on a new 57-foot wide bridge and transition into the new 
freeway near Carmel Valley Road. The existing Carmel River Bridge and 
the roadway between Oliver Road and the southern limits of the new 
alignment would be removed. A new connection between the existing 
highway at Oliver Road and the new alignment would be constructed with 
an at-grade intersection on the new alignment between Rio Road and the 
Carmel River Bridge. Interchanges on the new freeway will be 
constructed at Carmel Valley Road and at Carpenter Street. A grade 
separation will be constructed at Rio Road. Carmel Valley Road will be 
widened from two to four lanes between the existing highway and Carmel 
Rancho Boulevard.
    Litigation regarding this project commenced in January 1992 (City 
of Carmel-by-the-Sea, et al. v. United States Department of 
Transportation, et al., Civ. No. 92-20002 SW), when plaintiffs City of 
Carmel-by-the-Sea, Sierra Club, Hatton Canyon Coalition and the 
Monterey Peninsula Regional Park District filed an action alleging that 
the United States Department of Transportation (and several individual 
Federal officials) and the State of California Department of 
Transportation (and several individual State officials) failed to 
comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC Section 4321 
et seq (NEPA), and the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub. 
Res. Code Section 21000 et seq (CEQA), as well as Executive Orders 
11988 (floodplain management) and 11990 (protection of wetlands) in 
preparing an EIS/R and making findings for the project. The plaintiffs 
specifically alleged that the analysis in the EIS/R was deficient with 
respect to its analysis of wetlands impacts, analysis of Monterey Pine 
impacts, consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives, analysis 
of cumulative impacts, and analysis of growth-inducing impacts.
    In August of 1997, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 
Circuit found that the EIS/R was adequate under both NEPA and CEQA with 
respect to its analysis of wetlands impacts, analysis of Monterey Pine 
impacts, consideration of a reasonable range of alternatives and 
analysis of growth-inducing impacts. The Court of Appeals also found 
that the findings made pursuant to Executive Orders 11988 and 11990 
were proper. The Court of Appeals remanded the issue of the adequacy of 
the EIS/R with respect to its analysis of cumulative impacts to the 
United States District Court for the Northern District of California 
for further consideration. In July 1998, the District Court found that 
the EIS/R was inadequate with respect to its analysis of cumulative 
impacts, and enjoined construction of the project until such time as 
full compliance with NEPA and CEQA is established.
    The purpose of this supplemental EIS/R is to comply with the 
decision of the District Court. The supplement will address the 
deficiencies in the final EIS/R as determined in the litigation and 
make any necessary additional revisions to the final EIS/R.
    A public hearing will be held on the draft supplemental EIS/R. 
Public notice will be given of the time and place of the hearing. The 
draft supplemental EIS/R will be available for public and agency review 
and comment prior to the public hearing.
    Comments or questions concerning this proposed action and the 
supplemental EIS/R should be directed to the FHWA at the address 
provided above.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Research, Planning and Construction. The regulations 
implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental 
consultation on Federal programs and activities apply to this 
program)

    Issued on August 14, 1998.
G.P. Bill Wong,
Senior Transportation Engineer, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. 98-22541 Filed 8-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-M