[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 138 (Tuesday, July 18, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44519-44521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17947]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Natural Resources Conservation Service


South Chickamauga Creek Watershed: Catoosa, Walker, Whitfield 
Counties, Georgia; Bradley and Hamilton Counties, Tennessee

AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S.D.A.

ACTION: Notice of a Finding Of No Significant Impact.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969; the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations 
(40 CFR Part 1500); and the Natural Resources Conservation Service 
Regulations (7 CFR Part 650); the Natural Resources Conservation 
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, gives notice that an 
environmental impact statement is not being prepared for the South 
Chickamauga Creek Watershed, Catoosa, Walker, Whitfied Counties, 
Georgia and Bradley and Hamilton Counties, Tennessee.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Earl Cosby, State Conservationist, 
Natural Resources Conservation Service, Federal Building, STOP 200, 355 
E. Hancock

[[Page 44520]]

Avenue, Athens, Georgia 30601, telephone (706) 546-2272.

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION: The environmental assessment of this 
federally assisted action indicates that the project will not cause 
significant local, regional, or national impacts on the environment. As 
a result of these findings, Earl Cosby, State Conservationist, has 
determined that the preparation and review of an environmental impact 
statement is not needed for this project.
    The project purposes are watershed protection and improvement of 
water quality. The planned works of improvement include animal waste 
management systems and accelearated pasture and cropland treatment.
    The Notice of a Finding Of No Significant Impact (FONSI) has been 
forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency and to various 
Federal, State, and local agencies and interested parties. A limited 
number of copies of the FONSI are available to fill single copy 
requests at the above address. Basic data developed during the 
environmental assessment are on file and may be reviewed by contacting 
Cran Upshaw at the above number.
    No administrative action on implementation of the proposal will be 
taken until 30 days after the date of this publication in the Federal 
Register.

(This activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance under No. 10.904, Watershed Protection and Flood 
Prevention, and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 
12372, which requires intergovernment consultation with State and 
local officials.)

Earl Cosby,
State Conservationist.

Finding of No Significant Impact for South Chickamauga Creek 
Watershed, Catoosa, Walker, Whitfield Counties, GA; Bradley and 
Hamilton Counties, TN

July 2000.

Introduction

    The South Chickamauga Creek Watershed is a federally assisted 
action authorized for planning under Public Law 83-566, the Watershed 
Protection and Flood Prevention Act. An environmental assessment was 
undertaken in conjunction with the development of the watershed plan. 
This assessment was conducted in consultation with local, State, and 
Federal agencies as well as with interested organizations and 
individuals. Data developed during the assessment are available for 
public review at the following location: U.S. Department of 
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 355 East Hancock 
Avenue, Athens, Georgia 30601.

Recommended Action

    This document describes a plan for Watershed Protection and 
improvement of water quality and includes measures for the control of 
agricultural animal waste related pollution and reduction of sediment 
from pasture and cropland. The plan reduces excessive animal waste and 
associated nutrients and bacteria entering waterways from about 10 
dairy, 43 poultry and 159 beef operations. The plan also provides 
measures to reduce nutrient runoff and erosion on 304 acres of 
cropland, Sedimentation from streambanks and animal walkways will be 
substantially reduces and forage quality will be improves on 4,560 
acres of pastureland. These measures will be accomplished by providing 
financial and technical assistance through a local sponsor.
    The principal project measures are to:
    1. Develop and install approximately 212 animal waste management 
systems and provide enhanced cover to 4,560 acres of pastureland and 
adjoining stream banks to reduce sedimentation, improve water quality 
and enhance forage production. These practices will include all or 
parts of the following: fencing, cross fencing with gates, alternative 
livestock water supply with piping and troughs, stream crossings, 
riparian buffers, animal waste, lagoons, flush down and hose down 
systems, solid waste separators, heavy use protection areas, solid 
waste stack facilities and dead bird composters on 10 dairy, 43 poultry 
and 159 beef operations. Conservation management with nutrient and 
grazing land management practices will be used when applying animal 
waste.
    2. The measures will be planned and installed by developing long-
term contracts with landowners.

Effects of Recommended Action

    Installation of animal waste management measures and grazing land 
practices will reduce offsite nutrient, bacteria, sediment and chemical 
damages and increase utilization of nutrients onsite. The results will 
be a significant reduction in current impairments to the area's water 
quality, biological habitats, recreational opportunities, land values 
and improvement of long-term productivity and quality of pastureland in 
the watershed. Installation of the selected plan will also provide 
local and regional employment, promote rural economic development in 
the drainage area, and provide long term natural resource protection in 
the watershed.
    The project measures will reduce agricultural related nutrients, 
bacteria and sediment entering watershed streams, the South Chickamauga 
Creek and Nickajack Lake in Tennessee. The project will also minimize 
the impact on surface and ground water quality by:

--Reducing the 76 tons of nitrogen and 21 tons of phosphorus from 
animal waste operations delivered annually by an average of 47%.
--Providing a significant reduction in the amount of nitrates, ammonia, 
and bacteria delivered annually to area waterways, thus improving 
biological habitats, recreational opportunities, and real estate 
values.
--Reducing the 45,835 tons of sediment from streambanks and overgrazed 
pastureland.

    Grazing land practices will increase forage productivity through 
improved management and utilizing waste more efficiently. This will 
reduce stream enrichment and conserve the nutrients for plant 
production. The proposed plan will also encourage and promote the 
agricultural enterprises in the watershed through improved efficiency.
    Wildlife habitat will not be disturbed during installation of 
animal waste systems and grazing land practices. No wetlands, wildlife 
habitat, fisheries, prime farmland, or cultural resources will be 
destroyed or threatened by this project. Some 1,251 acres of wetland 
and wetland type wildlife habitat will be improved. Conversions to 
permanent vegetation will provide a more diverse upland game habitat. 
The value of woodland habitat will not decline. Fishery habitats will 
also be maintained.
    No endangered or threatened plant or animal species will be 
adversely affected by the project.
    There are no wilderness areas in the watershed.
    Scenic values will be complemented with improved riparian quality 
and cover conditions resulting from the installation of conservation 
animal waste management system and grazing land practices.

Alternatives

    Three alternative plans, that included 25 combinations of systems 
and practices, was considered in project planning. No significant 
adverse environmental impacts are anticipated from installation of the 
selected alternative. Also, the planned action is the most practical, 
complete and acceptable means of protecting the watershed by managing 
animal waste and stabilizing pasture and cropland.

[[Page 44521]]

Consultation--Public Participation

    Water quality concerns in the South Chickamauga Creek Watershed 
were expressed by local citizens, Soil and Water Conservation 
Districts, other regional residents. NRCS personnel in partnership with 
interagency team members from the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), 
Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Environmental 
Protection Division (EPD) made a watershed assessment and evaluated 
existing water quality data. The team determined that agricultural 
related water quality problems were negatively affecting the watershed 
and the region's air, plant, animal, soil, and water resources. With 
these concerns identified, the team agreed that a holistic approach for 
assistance to operators based on the watershed approach would help 
solve the problems. The Sponsors requested NRCS planning assistance 
under PL-566 authority for a watershed protection plan.
    At the initiation of the planning process, meetings were held with 
key farmers and District representatives from the watershed area to 
discuss problem identification, conservation systems and PL-566 
requirements. A public meeting was held on June 29, 1999 to scope the 
problems and concerns and to explain impacts of the PL-566 program 
initiatives relative to a watershed project and discuss possible 
solutions. Notice of the meeting appeared in the local newspaper and on 
radio for several weeks prior to the date. Door to door verbal 
invitations were also made. One hundred eighty landowners, operators 
and interested citizens attended the meeting.
    NRCS developed an interdisciplinary, interagency planning team to 
work with the Sponsor, landowners, and other interested groups. The 
team was compiled of specialists from NRCS, TVA, Ga. Cooperative 
Extension Service, EPD, along with local sponsors. The team worked in 
the watershed area and downstream to Nickajack Lake, to gain insight to 
the magnitude of the problems and possible solutions. Several meetings, 
group discussions, and interviews were held with local planners, 
individuals, government officials and other technical experts. 
Evaluations and alternative solutions were developed with the Sponsor 
and other officials. The Recommended Plan was agreed upon.
    Another public meeting was held in Rocksprings, Georgia on March 
21, 2000. Local operators, landowners and citizens attended the 
meeting. The results of surveys, studies, field investigations and the 
Recommended Plan were presented. The Recommended Plan was agreed upon 
by those in attendance.
    In April 2000, representatives of the NRCS, TVA, DNR, and other 
officials evaluated data to determine the quality and quantity of 
resources that would be impacted by selected practices and to consider 
possible mitigation measures. It was the consensus of the group that an 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was not needed for this project. 
This agreement was based on the type of practices and systems planned 
and that each would be installed on previously disturbed land. With 
this consensus, an Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared 
accordingly.
    Upon review of the EA, this Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) was prepared. These documents are being distributed to all 
concerned agencies, groups, and interested individuals. A Notice of 
Availability of the FONSI is being published in the Federal Register.
    Agency consolidations and public participation to date has shown no 
conflicts with the implementation of the selected plan.

Conclusion

    The Environmental Assessment summarized above indicates that this 
Federal action will not cause significant adverse local, regional, or 
national impacts on the environment. Therefore, based on the above 
findings, I have determined that an environmental impact statement for 
the recommended South Chickamauga Creek Watershed Plan is not required.

    Dated: July 10, 2000.
Earl Cosby,
State Conservationist.
[FR Doc. 00-17947 Filed 7-17-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-16-M