[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 86 (Monday, May 5, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23761-23764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-10983]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation


Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Klamath Project 
Operation, Oregon and California

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Supplemental information related to the notice of intent to 
prepare a draft environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is continuing work 
under the National Environmental Policy Act on an environmental impact 
statement (EIS) for the Klamath Project (Project)

[[Page 23762]]

operation, a Federal reclamation project, located in southern Oregon 
and northern California. This supplemental NOI is being published to 
describe the current proposed action, the purpose of and need for that 
proposal, and the scope of the EIS. Reclamation is proposing 
substantial changes in the proposed action alternatives that are 
relevant to environmental concerns, and there are new circumstances or 
information relevant to environmental concerns bearing on the proposed 
action or its impacts.

DATES: Reclamation is initiating a formal scoping period of 120 days 
following the publication of this supplemental NOI. Reclamation invites 
all interested parties to submit written comments or suggestions during 
the scoping period. Written comments should be sent to the Reclamation 
Project Manager (see ADDRESSES below) by September 2, 2003. Comments 
postmarked after that date will be considered to the extent practical.
    A public mailing that outlines the project timeline and public 
involvement opportunities is planned for distribution subsequent to 
publication of this supplemental NOI. Individuals who want to receive 
this mailing should contact us within 15 days of the publication of 
this supplemental NOI.

ADDRESSES: Please send written comments to Mr. Daniel S. Fritz, Project 
Manager, Klamath Basin Area Office, Mid-Pacific Region, Bureau of 
Reclamation, Attention: KO-150, 6600 Washburn Way, Klamath Falls, OR 
97603.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Daniel S. Fritz at 541-880-2556.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The preliminary alternatives developed in 
January 2001 are being reconsidered because many of the underlying 
assumptions used to develop alternatives for detailed analysis in the 
EIS have changed. The purpose of and need for the action should be 
clarified. This supplemental notice (1) summarizes the activities 
related to alternative formulation and other events to date, (2) 
defines and clarifies the proposed action, (3) defines and clarifies 
the purpose of and need for the proposal, and (4) defines and clarifies 
the scope of the action and the EIS. The proposed action was the 
subject of a Notice of Intent (NOI) published in the Federal Register 
(62 FR 61343, Nov 17, 1997) and a supplemental NOI published in the 
Federal Register (64 FR 6911, Feb 11, 1999).

Background

    In the November 1997 notice, Reclamation described the proposed 
action as ``* * * a plan for operations of the Klamath Project 
(Project) to cover an interim period, pending completion of a water 
rights adjudication * * *. The plan will be developed to define project 
operations in relation to Reclamation's responsibilities and 
obligations concerning the Endangered Species Act, senior water rights, 
tribal trust resources, Project water users' contractual rights, 
wildlife refuges and other requirements * * *.'' The proposed action 
was characterized as an ``interim'' plan for long-term operations.
    The February 1999 supplemental notice also stated the proposed 
action as ``an interim plan for long-term operations * * * pending 
completion of a water rights adjudication'' but clarified what the 
draft EIS would address by stating ``several alternative operational 
scenarios will be developed to define project operations in relation to 
Reclamation's legal responsibilities and obligations * * *.'' The 
supplemental notice also stated that it was being published because 
considerable time had passed without significant activity regarding 
development of the EIS.
    Reclamation proceeded with scoping by circulating a ``Summary of 
Klamath Project Operation Issues'' for public review and comment in 
January 1999. Reclamation received 31 responses to this document. No 
formal scoping meetings were held. A ``Scoping Report for the Long-Term 
Operations Plan for the Klamath Project'' that summarized the concerns 
and issues raised in the responses was prepared and distributed to the 
public in May 1999.
    A series of public information meetings were held in Klamath Falls, 
Oregon, Yreka, Orleans, Klamath, and Eureka, California, from May 17 
through May 20, 1999. Presentations included, among other topics, an 
overview of the EIS process, scoping issues, purpose and need, and 
alternatives. A total of 118 people attended these meetings.
    Also in May 1999, Reclamation invited several parties to 
participate as cooperating agencies (see 40 CFR 1501.6) in preparation 
of the EIS, including the Klamath Tribes, Yurok Tribe, Karuk Tribe, 
Hoopa Valley Tribe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), National 
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau 
of Land Management (BLM), U.S. Forest Service, Natural Resources 
Conservation Service (NRCS), California Department of Fish and Game, 
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Klamath County, Oregon, and 
Siskiyou and Modoc Counties, California, and the Klamath Water User's 
Association. The three counties and the Klamath Water User's 
Association entered into written cooperating agency agreements with 
Reclamation.
    Reclamation met with the cooperating agencies in July and September 
1999, and in March 2000, to discuss the scope, purpose and need, and 
alternatives for consideration in the EIS. By June 2000, Reclamation 
developed 10 preliminary alternatives for consideration and met with 
cooperating agencies in July 2000 to discuss the preliminary 
alternatives. In August 2000, Reclamation received the cooperating 
agencies' written comments on the preliminary alternatives and Chapter 
1 of the draft EIS, ``Purpose of and Need for the Action.'' In 
September 2000, Reclamation continued the alternative development 
process by evaluating the cooperating agencies' comments regarding the 
10 preliminary alternatives and subsequently reduced the number of 
alternatives from 10 to 5. Reclamation informed the cooperating 
agencies of the five tentative alternatives in a January 31, 2001 EIS 
status report, but advised them that further alternative development 
and analyses were pending completion of certain studies, such as the 
``Evaluation of Instream Flow Needs in Klamath Basin--Phase II Final 
Report'' (Hardy Report). This study and the forthcoming biological 
opinions may greatly influence further alternative development. If 
those studies and the biological opinions had been completed in early 
2001, Reclamation had planned to complete alternative development and 
finalize the alternatives by the end of April 2001.
    The Hardy Report has not yet been completed and the biological 
opinions were not received until early April 2001. Further, the 2001 
biological opinions did not address Project operation in all water year 
types; thus, Reclamation's ability to develop a long-term plan was 
delayed.
    In late 2000, Congress enacted the Klamath Basin Water Supply 
Enhancement Act (Pub. L. 106-498) (Enhancement Act). It directed 
Reclamation to undertake feasibility studies of certain actions that 
could enhance the water supply in the Upper Klamath Basin. Such studies 
include increasing the storage capacity and/or yield of Project 
facilities, development of additional Klamath Basin groundwater 
supplies, and the potential for further innovations in the use of 
existing water resources.
    The Enhancement Act also influences development of a long-term 
operations

[[Page 23763]]

plan. In March 2001, Reclamation undertook 1-year pilot programs for 
demand reduction and groundwater acquisition. In addition, Reclamation 
is proceeding with separate planning and NEPA documents for several 
Enhancement Act feasibility studies and activities, such as increasing 
the water storage capacity of Gerber Reservoir, winter irrigation in 
the Tule Lake area, and developing off-stream storage in the Lower 
Klamath Lake area.
    Concurrent with the EIS activities described above, severe drought 
during late 2000 and early 2001 in south-central Oregon and northern 
California resulted in a critically dry situation in the Project area. 
The resultant severe inflow shortage to Upper Klamath Lake, coupled 
with the minimum river flow and lake level requirements of the Service 
and NMFS final biological opinions issued in early April 2001, brought 
about Reclamation's decision in the 2001 Annual Operations Plan to 
curtail most Project water deliveries from the lake in 2001 and reduce 
Project water deliveries for agriculture and refuges from other Project 
reservoirs. California developed some groundwater wells in 2001 to help 
offset the water shortages.
    The 2001 Annual Operations Plan and related events substantially 
delayed Reclamation's progress with the EIS. Specifically, the 
biological opinions nullified most of the tentative alternatives and 
rendered successful development of a long-term operations plan and EIS 
dependent upon actions not within the defined scope of the EIS at that 
time. Reclamation continues to address the challenge of developing a 
long-term operations plan that meets obligations to Klamath River and 
Lost River water irrigators, tribes, and refuges and allows for 
operation of the Klamath Project in compliance with the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA).

Project Area Activities

    Agricultural water users, tribes, local residents, and many other 
parties affected by or interested in Project operation have undertaken 
numerous planning efforts since the summer of 2001. These efforts are 
attempting to develop a framework or structure of a comprehensive 
solution to water resource development and use in the Klamath Basin. 
These efforts have not yet come to fruition but are continuing on many 
levels, both formally and informally. The results of these efforts 
could be relevant to and may even influence long-term Project 
operations. Reclamation is cognizant of the interest and actions of 
these stakeholders and will consider the results of these other 
processes during development of the EIS.
    The National Academy of Science's Committee on Endangered and 
Threatened Fishes in the Klamath River Basin published an interim 
report in February 2002. This report focused on the 2001 biological 
opinions. The Committee's key conclusions were as follows:
    [sbull] Regarding Upper Klamath Lake elevations: ``The present 
scientific record is consistent with use of operational principles in 
effect between 1990 and 2000.''
    [sbull] Regarding Klamath River flows: ``On the whole, there is no 
convincing scientific justification at present for deviating from flows 
derived from operational practices in place between 1990 and 2000.''
    Reclamation views these findings as very relevant, and they will 
influence development of a long-term operations plan. If the NRC's 
findings in its final report are different, the later findings will be 
considered and included in the development of this operations plan.
    In early 2002, Reclamation completed a biological assessment (BA) 
of the effects of proposed Klamath Project operations on federally 
listed threatened and endangered species for a 10-year period (April 1, 
2002, through March 31, 2012). An underlying objective of evaluating a 
10-year period is to develop an operation that considers all 
hydrological conditions during a multiple year period-this is ``long-
term'' operation. Reclamation submitted the final BA to the Service and 
NMFS in conformance with requirements for formal consultation under 
ESA. Consistent with ESA regulations, 50 CFR 402.14(g)(5), Reclamation 
worked closely with the Service and NMFS to develop reasonable and 
prudent alternatives for Project operation to avoid jeopardy to the 
listed species. The Service and NMFS each issued final biological 
opinions on the proposed action on May 31, 2002, which included those 
reasonable and prudent alternatives.

The Proposed Action

    Reclamation proposes to implement an operations plan through March 
2012 that provides for continued operation of the Klamath Project in a 
way that meets its legal obligations.

Operational Elements

    Reclamation is presently operating the Project consistent with the 
May 2002 biological opinions (opinions) on Project operation issued by 
the Service and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA) Fisheries (formerly National Marine Fisheries Service). The 
opinions apply to Project operation through March 31, 2012.
    Reclamation has undertaken an operational review of historic and 
ongoing Project operations to identify significant issues and effects 
related to those operations. The operational review will help 
Reclamation identify potential new actions that may be implemented to 
address the effects of operation and help meet its legal obligations 
related to Project operation. The operational review and development of 
an operations plan may result in new Federal actions that could lead to 
changes in Project operation and/or facilities. While no specific 
modifications are as yet proposed, Reclamation anticipates that such 
modifications will be identified and proposed as the operational review 
proceeds and the operations plan is developed. The operations plan 
would be an adaptive plan that describes management actions for 
operation of the Project's features and facilities to meet the defined 
needs through March 31, 2012. It would describe a process for 
anticipating and adapting demand for Project water annually during a 
multiple year period and during different hydrological conditions 
(ranging from very dry to very wet). It would be subject to revision 
when necessary (adapt) to address new information or circumstances that 
have bearing on Project operation and/or Project effects.
    The following key elements of an operations plan have been 
tentatively developed during ESA consultations with the Service and 
NOAA Fisheries.
    [sbull] The proposed action would be consistent with historic 
Project operation from water year 1990 (which began October 1, 1989) 
through water year 1999 (which ended September 30, 1999).
    [sbull] The proposed action would include development of annual 
operating criteria developed consistent with the 2002 biological 
opinion RPA.
    [sbull] The proposed action would also include development and use 
of a ``water bank'' of up to 100,000 acre-feet annually that would be 
acquired from several sources. (Began in 2002).
    [sbull] Continued coordination with the Service, NOAA Fisheries, 
Klamath Basin Tribes, PacifiCorp, and irrigation districts to 
coordinate ongoing and anticipated Project operation activities and to 
discuss water supply conditions.
    [sbull] Entrainment reduction into the A Canal from Upper Klamath 
Lake (under construction) and fish passage at Link River Dam.

[[Page 23764]]

    [sbull] Development and participation in a basinwide Conservation 
Implementation Program.
    [sbull] Additional water supplies resulting from reasonably 
foreseeable actions that may be implemented during the proposed period 
of operation.

Purpose of the Proposed Action

    The purpose of the proposed action is to operate the authorized 
features and facilities of the Project during varying hydrological 
conditions through March 2012 to meet Reclamation's legal obligations 
and responsibilities as described in the need for the proposed action 
in the following section. Reclamation's goal is to retain Project 
viability in a manner that not only seeks to avoid jeopardizing 
federally listed threatened and endangered species, but also to 
conserve and protect those species and to address Reclamation's tribal 
trust obligation. The purpose of any new Federal actions stemming from 
the operations plan development that could result in changes or 
modification in Project operation or facilities would be to assist 
Reclamation in meeting its obligations and responsibilities related to 
annual and long-term Project operations.

Need for the Proposed Action

    The need for the proposed action stems from an underlying need to 
reduce uncertainty, to the extent possible, by Reclamation, 
agricultural water users, tribes, national wildlife refuges, and other 
interested/affected parties about both short-term and long-term 
availability of Project water. There is a need to operate the Project 
consistent with applicable laws and to meet Reclamation's obligations 
related to operation of the Project. Those needs are:
    [sbull] To deliver Project water in accordance with the Klamath 
Project water rights and contracts between Reclamation and agricultural 
water users;
    [sbull] To comply with requirements of the ESA;
    [sbull] To operate the Project in a manner that does not interfere 
with the Tribes' senior water rights;
    [sbull] To provide adequate water to Lower Klamath and Tule Lake 
National Wildlife Refuges to fulfill their Federal reserved water 
rights, when in priority and when water is available.

Scope of the Proposed Action

    The scope of the proposed action is developing a multi-year 
operations plan consistent with the purpose and need above. The scope 
of the DEIS consists of the range of actions, alternatives, and 
potential impacts to be considered by Reclamation. Those actions 
involve all elements of Project operations that Reclamation can 
implement that may affect the Project water supply and demand. Such 
actions include, but are not limited to, Project water (1) storage 
volume, location, and timing; (2) source (surface and/or groundwater); 
(3) delivery quantity, timing, and duration, and (4) quality. The 
potential environmental impacts to be considered in the DEIS are 
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects that may arise from the 
proposed action and alternatives.
    The geographic scope of the DEIS includes areas and resources 
affected by water diversion, storage and delivery for Project purposes. 
This includes, but is not necessarily limited to: (1) The sites of all 
Project features and facilities (such as dams, reservoirs, canals, 
drains, pumping plant/stations) and areas adjacent to those sites that 
are subject to Reclamation's ownership, management or control; (2) 
lands that receive Project irrigation or drainage water; and (3) areas 
adjacent to Clear Lake, Gerber Reservoir, Miller Creek, Lost River, 
Tule Lake, Lower Klamath Lake, Upper Klamath Lake, Link River, Lake 
Ewauna, and the Klamath River downstream from Link River Dam subject to 
fluctuating water levels and/or flows that result from Project 
operation.

Summary

    Reclamation is redirecting its planning and EIS efforts to address 
a multiyear operations plan. The scope, magnitude, and intensity of the 
efforts required to develop alternatives in a different manner will be 
clarified in the EIS. In so doing, additional time may be necessary to 
develop and analyze the effects of the actions and to complete the EIS.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review. Individual 
respondents may request that we withhold their home address from public 
disclosure, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There 
also may be circumstances in which we would withhold a respondent's 
identity from public disclosure, as allowable by law. If you wish us to 
withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at 
the beginning of your comment letter. We will make all submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, available for public disclosure in their entirety.

    Dated: April 24, 2003.
Frank Michny,
Regional Environmental Officer, Mid-Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 03-10983 Filed 5-2-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MN-U