[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 9, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51391-51394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-25135]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Notice of Intent 
To Prepare a Restoration Plan and Programmatic Environmental Impact 
Statement/Environmental Impact Report (RP/EIS); Request for Comments

AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 
Commerce.

SUMMARY: Natural Resource Trustee agencies (the Trustees) have formed 
the Montrose Settlements Restoration Program (MSRP) to plan and oversee 
the restoration of natural resources that have been injured by the 
release of hazardous substances, DDTs and PCBs, in the Southern 
California Bight marine environment. The MSRP will prepare a 
Restoration Plan and programmatic Environmental Impact Statement/ 
Environmental Impact Report (RP/EIS) addressing the restoration of 
these natural resources. The Trustees announce the initiation of a 
public process to determine the scope of issues under consideration. 
The purpose of this notice is to inform the public of this process and 
the opportunity to participate in the development of the RP/EIS. All 
persons affected by, or otherwise interested in, the proposed 
restoration plan are invited to participate in determining the scope of 
significant issues to be considered in the RP/EIS by submitting written 
comments or by attending scoping meetings. Through the scoping process, 
the Trustees will identify and prioritize alternatives for potential 
restoration actions.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing on or before November 24, 
2001. Public meetings have been scheduled October 13, 2001, October 21, 
2001, November 1, 2001. Details on these meetings are provided in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted to: The Montrose Settlements 
Restoration Program, c/o NOAA's Office of General Counsel, 501 W. Ocean 
Boulevard, Suite 4470, Long Beach, California 90802. Alternatively, 
comments may be submitted electronically to the following E-mail 
address: [email protected]. All comments received, including names and 
addresses, will become part of the public record.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Boyce, Montrose Settlements 
Restoration Program c/o NOAA's Office of General Counsel 501 W. Ocean 
Boulevard, Suite 4470, Long Beach, California 90802, (562) 980-4086; or 
visit the MSRP web site at: www.darcnw.noaa.gov/montrose.htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    During the period from the late 1940s to the early 1970s, Los 
Angeles area industries discharged and dumped thousands of tons of DDTs 
and PCBs into ocean waters off the Southern California coast. Almost 
all of the DDT originated from the Montrose Chemical Corporation's 
manufacturing plant in Torrance, CA, and was discharged into Los 
Angeles County sewers that empty into the Pacific Ocean at White Point, 
on the Palos Verdes shelf. Montrose also dumped hundreds of tons of 
DDT-contaminated waste into the ocean near Santa Catalina Island. 
Additionally, large quantities of PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) from 
numerous sources throughout the L.A. basin were released into ocean 
waters through the Los Angeles County sewer system. In 1992 and 1993, 
United States Geological Survey (USGS) surveys found that more than 100 
metric tons (110 US tons) of DDTs and 10 metric tons (11 US tons) of 
PCBs remained in the sediments of the Palos Verdes Shelf.
    In 1990, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the California 
Attorney General filed a lawsuit under CERCLA, alleging that a number 
of defendants were responsible for releasing DDTs and PCBs and other 
hazardous substances into the environment. The lawsuit charged that the 
DDTs and PCBs injured natural resources, including fish and wildlife 
that live in and around coastal waters in Southern California.
    The state and federal governments have settled the final remaining 
legal claims brought in 1990. A total of $140 million in damages have 
been paid under four separate settlement agreements. The majority of 
the settlement money will go to the U.S. EPA to reduce the exposure of 
people and wildlife to DDTs and PCBs. Approximately $30 million is 
available for natural resource restoration projects.
Injuries to Natural Resources
    DDTs and PCBs are slow to break down and, therefore, bioaccumulate 
and become more concentrated in animals at higher levels in the food 
web. When feeding on prey contaminated with DDTs and PCBs, animals at 
the top of the food web, such as bald eagles and peregrine falcons, can 
accumulate injurious concentration of these chemicals. DDTs in 
particular cause these birds to produce eggs with shells that are so 
thin that they allow developing embryos to dry out, or they break when 
the adults sit on them during incubation.
    Bald eagles were a resident breeding species on all of the 
California Channel Islands from before the turn of the century until at 
least the 1930's. The last confirmed nesting of an eagle on the Channel 
Islands was in 1947. By the early 1960s, bald eagles had disappeared 
from all of the Channel Islands.
    The American peregrine falcon preys on birds of both aquatic and 
terrestrial ecosystems. As mentioned above, DDTs cause eggshell 
thinning in birds, including peregrines. This reduces the number of 
fledglings per nest, which eventually decreases the number of adults in 
the breeding population. Peregrines were relatively common throughout 
California in the early 1900s and were part of Native American history 
and culture. The peregrines declined dramatically in North America 
following the application of DDT beginning in the 1940s. In California,

[[Page 51392]]

only two breeding pairs were found in 1970, where formerly there had 
been hundreds of known pairs. The Channel Islands population, which 
historically was 15-20 pairs, was eliminated between the mid-1940s and 
the early 1960s.
    Many common sports fish in the L.A. area (approximately 50 species 
in eight groups) have levels of DDTs that exceed the State of 
California trigger level (0.1 ppm wet weight). A number of these sports 
fish also have concentrations of PCBs that exceed State of California 
trigger levels. Consequently, the State of California has issued health 
advisories warning to limit or avoid consumption of these fish at 
certain coastal locations of Los Angeles and Orange Counties. In 
addition, because of high levels of DDTs and PCBs in white croaker, the 
State has imposed bag limits for this fish and has banned commercial 
fishing for white croaker in the vicinity of the Palos Verdes Shelf.
    By present estimates, DDTs and PCBs will continue to contaminate 
marine resources and birds in Southern California for decades. If 
instituted, clean up options under evaluation by the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency would reduce the severity of DDT and PCB 
contamination in the local ecosystem. At present, however, it appears 
not to be feasible to clean up all of the area contaminated with DDTs 
and PCBs, so some resources will continue to be injured.

Restoration Planning

    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act (CERCLA or ``Superfund,'' 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.) 
designates as possible natural resource trustees Federal, state, or 
tribal authorities who represent the public interest in natural 
resources. The trustees are responsible for recovering funds through 
litigation or settlement for damages for natural resource injuries. 
CERCLA requires that any recovered monies be used to ``restore, 
replace, or acquire the equivalent of'' the natural resources that have 
been injured by a release of a hazardous substance. The trustees are 
required to develop a restoration plan before settlement money can be 
spent on restoration projects. The Trustees include the: National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Commerce; U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service, U.S. Department of 
the Interior; California Department of Fish and Game; California State 
Lands Commission; and California Department of Parks and Recreation.
    The restoration plan and programmatic environmental impact 
statement/environmental impact report (RP/EIS) will be prepared in 
accordance with the requirements of CERCLA, the National Environmental 
Policy Act, (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the California 
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Pub. Res. Code sections 21000-
21177.1). The Trustees' primary task is to determine how best to 
restore, replace, rehabilitate, or acquire the equivalent of the 
injured natural resources, and the Trustees are seeking the assistance 
of the public in this process. The Trustees must use the settlement 
monies to restore natural resources that were harmed by the DDTs and 
PCBs that were at issue in the Montrose litigation. By incorporating 
the public in the process and developing a formal restoration plan, 
there is a greater likelihood of success and acceptance.
    The restoration planning process is aimed at developing a strategy 
for restoring habitats, species, and natural resource services that are 
lost or impaired as a result of the releases of DDTs and PCBs at issue 
in the Montrose litigation.
    The draft RP/EIS will describe the restoration alternatives 
considered and identify a preferred restoration alternative. The RP/EIS 
will, among other things, include an analysis of the effects of each 
restoration alternative on the quality of the human environment, the 
relative effectiveness of alternative actions in achieving restoration 
goals using criteria developed for evaluating the alternatives, and the 
estimated costs of the alternatives.
    The alternative projects will be described in the RP/EIS on a 
conceptual level since the plan is being prepared prior to the 
completion of detailed studies needed to design specific projects. At a 
later stage in the restoration process, after more detailed information 
is developed, public involvement will once again be sought through the 
preparation of supplemental environmental documentation and additional 
public comment periods.

Criteria

    As required by CERCLA, restoration projects must be closely related 
to the lost or injured resources. The Trustees have compiled the 
following initial set of criteria for analyzing potential restoration 
projects for this case:
    Nexus to Injured Resources--As described above, restoration efforts 
of the MSRP are directed at projects that restore, rehabilitate, 
replace, enhance or acquire the equivalent of the resources and 
services impacted by the release of DDTs and PCBs.
    Feasibility--Based on past experience or studies, the restoration 
projects must be technically and procedurally sound.
    No Duplicate or Replacement Funding--The Trustees will not fund 
projects that are already going to be funded or accomplished by other 
means or should be funded by more appropriate sources.
    Legality--The projects must comply with all applicable laws.
    Likelihood of Success--Projects will be evaluated for their 
potential for success, including the level of expected return of 
resources and resource services. Performance criteria of projects will 
have to be clear and measurable.
    Cost Effectiveness--The projects will be evaluated by considering 
the relationship of expected project costs to the expected resource/
service benefits from each project alternative.
    Multiple Resource Benefits--Benefits can be increased if proposed 
projects benefit more than one natural resource or resource service.
    Duration of Benefits--As described previously, contamination by 
DDTs and PCBs is expected to continue for decades. Long-term benefits 
are the objective of these projects, and the Trustees will evaluate 
project alternatives according to their expected duration of benefits.
    Public Health and Safety--Possibility that a proposed alternative 
would create a threat to the health and safety of the public will be 
part of the evaluation process.
    Likelihood of Adverse Impacts--Evaluation of projects will include 
examination of potential adverse impacts on the environment and the 
associated natural resources.
    Opportunities for Collaboration--Cost effectiveness can be enhanced 
by matching funds, in-kind services, or volunteer assistance as well as 
coordination with on-going or proposed projects.
    Proposals for alternative restoration concepts should attempt to 
meet these criteria. As part of the scoping process, newly proposed 
projects can be identified and incorporated into the restoration 
planning process provided that they meet legal requirements, technical 
feasibility and selection criteria.

Alternatives

    Currently, the Trustees have identified six categories of 
restoration projects to be developed further in the draft RP/EIS. 
Through the scoping process, the Trustees are seeking public comment on 
these project concepts. The

[[Page 51393]]

Trustees are also seeking input on any other categories of restoration 
projects not already included here that the public believes may fulfill 
the restoration objectives identified for this case.
    The Trustees will evaluate whether each project proposed satisfies 
the fundamental requirement restoration actions must meet in the 
Montrose case, i.e. that they restore, replace, rehabilitate, and/or 
acquire the equivalent of the natural resources injured and services 
lost as a result of the DDTs and PCBs at issue in the Montrose 
litigation. (Natural resource ``services'' are the functions a resource 
performs for the benefit of another natural resource and/or for the 
benefit of the public.) The highest priority will go to projects that 
most directly and effectively restore the natural resources still being 
harmed by the DDTs and PCBs. Thus, the Trustees will focus restoration 
efforts on the bald eagles, peregrine falcons, and fishing resources 
still being affected by these contaminants. Projects that only 
indirectly address the injuries to these resources, or that address 
injuries to other resources that were not the focus of the government's 
case, will receive secondary priority.
    The six categories of restoration projects identified at this point 
by the Trustees are:

1. Continued Reintroduction of Bald Eagles to Santa Catalina Island

    In 1980, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Institute for 
Wildlife Studies, with the cooperation of the California Department of 
Fish and Game and the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy, initiated a 
program to reintroduce bald eagles to Catalina Island. Between 1980 and 
1986, 33 eagles were placed in three different artificial nest or 
hacking platforms on Catalina Island. The first eggs were laid in 1987, 
but broke soon after they were laid. Subsequent contaminant analysis of 
egg remains revealed DDE (a metabolite of DDT) levels sufficient to 
cause complete reproductive failure.
    The trustees are currently developing a long-term restoration plan 
for the eagles on Catalina Island. Elements of this plan may include 
continued manipulation of eggs and chicks at each nest site and 
additional hacking of birds onto the island.

2. Expansion of Efforts To Reintroduce Bald Eagles to All the Northern 
Channel Islands

    The Trustees are preparing to initiate a study to determine the 
feasibility of reintroducing bald eagles to other Channel Islands where 
they historically bred. The results of the feasibility study will be 
used by the Trustees to evaluate whether to proceed with a full-scale 
reintroduction program to additional islands in the Channel Islands 
National Park or other Channel Islands where they historically bred, 
and aid in the development of plans for such a program. Potential 
activities of this program would include releasing additional bald 
eagles with the hope to establish breeding sites on several of the 
Northern Channel Islands.

3. Restoration of Peregrine Falcons on the Channel Islands

    The intent of this proposed restoration project would be to restore 
a stable and healthy population of peregrine falcons throughout the 
Channel Islands including the southern islands. The proposed 
restoration project would involve the reintroduction of additional 
birds to all of the Channel Islands. An intensive monitoring effort 
would also be included in the project to determine the success of the 
restoration effort and to document any future impacts due to pesticides 
on the recovering population.

4. Cleaner Fish for Anglers: Projects To Restore Fishing Injured by 
DDTs and PCBs

    Since the Trustees do not have a way to entirely eliminate 
contamination of local sports fish, the Trustees are considering 
restoration projects that will, instead, increase the abundance and 
availability of cleaner fish at easily accessible fishing locations. In 
addition, these projects would displace highly contaminated fish, such 
as white croaker. These restoration projects will have to provide 
sustainable fishing for sizes and species of fish that would satisfy 
anglers' requirements for acceptable fishing.
    One way to do this is to modify the habitats for fish at easily 
accessible locations for fishing, such as piers, jetties, and other 
nearshore locations. Surveys of fish in different habitats indicate 
that white croaker frequents sandy and muddy areas, but avoids rocky 
habitats. In contrast, less contaminated species of fish, such as 
rockfish, are most abundant in rocky areas, including kelp beds. The 
Trustees will examine the feasibility of placing rocky habitat, 
including kelp habitat, in sandy/muddy areas where anglers now catch 
large amounts of white croaker.
    Examples of such projects are constructed reefs, which have been 
used widely and successfully to increase the local abundance of sports 
fish. There is some controversy as to whether constructed reefs 
actually increase the production and overall populations of fish or 
merely attract fish; however, studies have provided evidence that the 
production of fish on relatively large constructed reefs in Southern 
California is about nine times greater than on adjacent sand habitat. 
Regardless of whether providing more fish by production or attraction, 
constructed rocky habitat could serve the purpose of providing local 
anglers with a greater availability of cleaner fish.
    Other methods, such as ``fish aggregation devices'' also exist to 
make desirable fish more available to anglers. The Trustees will 
examine and evaluate all available methods that would serve the double 
purpose of decreasing the availability of highly contaminated sports 
fish while also increasing the availability of clean sports fish.
    As another measure to provide anglers access to cleaner fish, the 
Trustees may conduct long-term, multi-cultural education campaigns so 
anglers will have the information they need to choose the safest 
species of fish to eat and the best locations to catch these fish. Such 
activities would be conducted in close collaboration with other 
federal, state, and local agencies.

5. Wetlands and Estuarine Projects To Benefit Resources Injured in the 
Montrose Case

    The Trustees will evaluate projects creating or enhancing habitats 
in estuaries and coastal wetlands as restoration to address the 
injuries caused by DDTs and PCBs in the Montrose case.
    Coastal wetlands and estuarine habitats are spawning grounds and 
nurseries for certain sports fish, and they produce sources of food 
that contribute to the productivity of coastal sports fish populations. 
Coastal wetlands and estuaries may also benefit the injured populations 
of bald eagles and peregrine falcons by increasing productivity of 
potential prey species.
    Coastal wetlands in Southern California have been extensively 
destroyed and degraded; consequently, there is a widespread and well-
documented need for creating and improving wetlands to benefit the 
larger coastal ecosystem. However, the benefits provided by wetlands 
and estuaries restoration projects vary among sites and depend on many 
factors. The Trustees' evaluation of such projects will focus on the 
extent to which they can directly and effectively provide cleaner fish 
to local anglers and cleaner or more abundant prey for local bald 
eagles and peregrine falcons.

[[Page 51394]]

6. Seabird Projects

    As stated above, the Montrose litigation and settlements were 
focused on those injuries that appeared to be continuing. The Trustees 
recognize that a variety of other species such as brown pelicans and 
double-crested cormorants were severely affected by DDT in the past. 
Substantial seabird populations occur in the Southern California Bight, 
including breeding and non-breeding birds.
    Since these populations have declined from historical numbers, they 
provide an opportunity for restoration projects. Efforts to enhance the 
populations of marine birds in the SCB could also benefit reintroduced 
bald eagles and peregrine falcons by providing prey that may contain 
lower contaminant levels than other food sources such as carcasses of 
marine mammals. The Trustees may explore methods to enhance the 
populations of seabirds through the development of innovative 
restoration concepts, such as reducing anthropogenic impacts and other 
factors that adversely affect the seabirds' survival.
    These project concepts are described in further detail in a public 
scoping document issued on August 24, 2001 by the trustees to inform 
the public of the restoration planning process and to seek input from 
affected individuals and groups. The scoping document may be obtained 
from the MSRP web site (www.darcnw.noaa.gov/montrose/htm), or by a copy 
may be requested by calling (866) 795-7786 or by sending an e-mail 
request to [email protected].

Public Scoping Meetings

    The Trustees have scheduled three public meetings in the fall of 
2001. Comments will be received at these meetings and throughout the 
scoping period. The scoping meetings are scheduled as follows:
    1. Saturday, October 13, 2001, 3:30 p.m.-6:30 p.m., Channel Islands 
National Park Headquarters, 1901 Spinnaker Drive, Ventura, CA.
    2. Sunday, October 21, 2001, 10:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m., Cabrillo Sea 
Fair event, Cabrillo Aquarium, 3720 Stephen White Drive, San Pedro, 
CA--The Trustees will sponsor an information booth and be available to 
answer questions.
    3. Thursday, November 1, 2001, 7:00 p.m. -9:00 p.m., Ken Edwards 
Center, 1527 Fourth Street, Santa Monica, CA.
    The purpose of these meetings will be to introduce the public to 
the MSRP staff and Trustee Council, define the Trustees' role and 
responsibilities, explain what restoration means and the legal 
requirements that must be followed. Additionally, the Trustees will 
present the restoration goals, objectives, and project selection 
criteria for this case, and describe the restoration alternatives the 
Trustees plan to develop in the RP/EIS. The Trustees will take comments 
from the public on the factors they would like addressed concerning the 
restoration alternatives presented, as well as taking comments on other 
restoration alternatives the public would like the Trustees to 
consider.

Administrative Record

    The Trustees have made available for public review the documents 
comprising the Administrative Record (Record) of the Montrose 
Settlements Restoration Program. The Record includes documents that the 
Trustees have relied upon during the development of the RP/EIS, and 
that form the basis for determining a restoration action under CERCLA 
and NEPA. Documents now in the Record include a copy of this notice, 
the MSRP fact sheet, the scoping document, and consent decrees. Other 
documents will be added as the restoration process progresses.
    The Record is available for viewing at NOAA's Office of General 
Counsel for Natural Resources, located at: 501 West Ocean Blvd, Suite 
4700, Long Beach, CA 90802 The repository is open from 9:00 to 5:00 
Monday through Friday, except for Federal holidays. Arrangements may be 
made to the review the Record by contacting Kolleen Bannon at 501 W. 
Ocean Blvd., suite 4470, Long Beach, CA 90802 or by calling her at 562-
980-4078.

How To Submit Comments

    Pursuant to NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et 
seq., and CEQA, Pub. Res. Code sections 21000-21177.1, the Trustees 
seek public involvement in determining the scope of significant issues 
to be considered in the RP/EIS. Comments should be sent to the Montrose 
Settlements Restoration Program, NOAA, Suite 4470, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., 
Long Beach, CA 90803, (866) 795-7786. Comments also may be submitted by 
e-mail to msrp.noaa.gov. Comments should be received on or before 
November 24, 2001.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. and 9601 et. seq.

    Dated: October 1, 2001.
Alan Neuschatz,
Chief Financial Officer/Chief Administrative Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-25135 Filed 10-5-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-JE-P