[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 140 (Friday, July 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42756-42758]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17610]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R2-ES-2012-N099: FXES11120200000F2-112-FF02ENEH00]


Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Habitat 
Conservation Plan for Incidental Take of 11 Federally Listed or 
Petitioned Species by the Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation 
Program in 8 Texas Counties

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability; announcement of public meetings; and 
request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the 
availability of the draft environmental impact statement and the draft 
Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation Program (EARIP) habitat 
conservation plan, under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 
The EARIP has applied for an incidental take permit (TE63663A-0) under 
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, that would authorize 
incidental take of animal species and impacts to plant species (covered 
species) in all, or portions, of eight Texas counties.

DATES: Comment Period: To ensure consideration of your written 
comments, they must be received on or before close of business (4:30 
p.m. C.S.T.) October 18, 2012.
    Public Meetings: Seven public meetings will be held throughout the 
region affected by the management of the Edwards Aquifer. The dates and 
times for each meeting location (Corpus Christi, Kerrville, New 
Braunfels, San Antonio, San Marcos, Uvalde, and Victoria) will be 
announced in local newspapers at least 2 weeks before each meeting and 
will also be posted on the following Web sites: http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/ and http://earip.org.

ADDRESSES: To obtain documents for review, see Reviewing Documents in 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    To submit comments, please use one of the following methods, and 
note that your comment is in reference to the Edwards Aquifer Recovery 
Implementation Program (TE63663A-0):
     Email: [email protected].
     U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, Austin Ecological Services 
Field Office, 10711 Burnett Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758-4460; 
telephone 512/490-0057.
     Fax: 512/490-0974.
     We will also accept written and oral comments at the 
public meetings (see DATES).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, 
by U.S. mail at U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Austin Ecological 
Services Field Office, 10711 Burnett Road, Suite 200, Austin, TX 78758-
4460; or by telephone 512/490-0057.

[[Page 42757]]


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the requirements of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
seq.), we advise the public that:
    1. We have gathered the information necessary to determine impacts 
and formulate alternatives for the draft environmental impact statement 
(DEIS) related to potential issuance of an incidental take permit (ITP) 
to the Applicants; and
    2. The Applicants have developed a draft habitat conservation plan 
(DHCP) as part of the application for an ITP, which describes the 
measures the Applicants have agreed to take to minimize and mitigate 
the effects of incidental take of covered species to the maximum extent 
practicable pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973 (Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
    The Applicants have applied for an ITP (TE63663A-0) under section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The requested ITP, which would be in effect for 
a period of 15 years if granted, would authorize incidental take of 
seven federally listed animal species (covered species), including the 
endangered fountain darter (Etheostoma fonticola), threatened San 
Marcos salamander (Eurycea nana), endangered San Marcos gambusia 
(Gambusia georgei), endangered Texas blind salamander (Typhlomolge 
[=Eurycea] rathbuni), endangered Peck's cave amphipod (Stygobromus 
pecki), endangered Comal Springs dryopid beetle (Stygoparnus 
comalensis), and the endangered Comal Springs riffle beetle (Heterelmis 
comalensis); as well as impacts to endangered Texas wild rice (Zizania 
texana). The requested ITP would also cover three petitioned species, 
including Edwards Aquifer diving beetle (Haideoporus texanus), Comal 
Springs salamander (Eurycea sp.), and Texas troglobitic water slater 
(Lirceolus smithii) in case they are listed during the duration of the 
ITP. As described in the DHCP, the proposed incidental take could occur 
in Bexar, Medina and Uvalde Counties, and portions of Atascosa, 
Caldwell, Comal, Guadalupe, and Hays Counties in Texas (Permit Area), 
and would result from activities associated with otherwise lawful 
activities including the regulation and use of groundwater for 
irrigation, industrial, municipal, domestic, and livestock purposes; 
the use of instream flows in the Comal River and San Marcos River for 
recreational uses; and other operational and maintenance activities 
that could affect Comal Springs, San Marcos Springs, and the associated 
river systems. The DEIS considers the direct, indirect, and cumulative 
effects of implementation of the HCP, including the measures that will 
be implemented to minimize and mitigate such impacts to the maximum 
extent practicable.
    Take of listed plant species is not defined in the Act, although 
the Act does identify several prohibitions. However, because covered 
species in the EARIP HCP include both animals and a plant, in the 
following discussion we use the term ``incidental take'' when 
discussing impacts to covered plants, as well as actual incidental take 
of covered animals.

Background

    We published a notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental 
impact statement in the Federal Register on March 5, 2010 (75 FR 
10305), and held public scoping meetings in connection with the 
requested permit. The NOI opened a comment period that lasted until 
June 3, 2010. A summary of comments provided during the 2010 scoping 
period, which included public meetings held that year in seven Texas 
cities as follows: Victoria on April 1, New Braunfels on April 12, 
Uvalde on April 14, San Marcos on April 19, San Antonio on April 26, 
Corpus Christi on April 28, and Kerrville on April 29, is available on 
the Service's Web site at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/ 
and on the Applicants' Web site at http://earip.org.
    The Edwards Aquifer Recovery Implementation Program (EARIP) 
comprises a diverse group of regional stakeholders from South Central 
Texas that undertook a collaborative, consensus-based process to 
develop a plan to protect and contribute to the recovery of listed 
species associated with Comal and San Marcos Springs while also 
protecting the Edwards Aquifer (Aquifer) as a water supply source. The 
EARIP completed a DHCP, and the Edwards Aquifer Authority; San Antonio 
Water Systems; City of New Braunfels, Texas; City of San Marcos, Texas; 
and Texas State University (collectively, the Applicants) have applied 
to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an ITP under the 
Act. The Applicants submitted the EARIP DHCP as part of the ITP 
application package. We prepared a DEIS that evaluates the permit 
application in accordance with the requirements of NEPA.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action involves the issuance of an ITP by the Service 
for the Covered Activities in the Permit Area pursuant to section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The ITP would cover ``take'' of the Covered 
Species associated with otherwise lawful activities including the 
regulation and use of groundwater for irrigation, industrial, 
municipal, domestic, and livestock purposes; the use of instream flows 
in the Comal River and San Marcos River for recreational uses; and 
other operational and maintenance activities that could affect Comal 
Springs, San Marcos Springs, and the associated river systems. The 
requested term of the ITP is 15 years. To meet the requirements of a 
section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, the Applicants have developed and propose 
to implement their DHCP, which describes the conservation measures the 
Applicants have agreed to undertake to minimize and mitigate the 
impacts of the proposed incidental take of the Covered Species to the 
maximum extent practicable, and ensures that incidental take will not 
appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of these 
species in the wild. This alternative provides a comprehensive 
mitigation approach for unavoidable impacts to Covered Species and 
reduces potential permit processing effort for the Service.

Other Alternatives Considered

    We considered three alternatives to the proposed action.
    1. No Action--No ITP would be issued. Under this alternative the 
management and use of the Aquifer and the use of areas associated with 
the Comal and San Marcos Springs would continue regardless of whether a 
section10(a)(1)(B) permit is sought or issued. The Applicants would 
continue to be subject to the take prohibitions of the ESA. Where 
potential impacts could not be avoided, and where a Federal nexus 
exists, measures designed to minimize and mitigate for the impacts 
would be addressed through individual formal or informal consultation 
with the Service. In the absence of a Federal nexus, the Applicants and 
other parties in the region would potentially need individual section 
10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits on a project-by-project basis if 
their activities might result in incidental take of Federally listed 
species within the proposed permit area. This project-by-project 
approach would be more time-consuming, less efficient, and could result 
in an isolated, independent mitigation approach that might be less 
beneficial to the covered species than the proposed regional permit.
    2. Another considered alternative explored the use of expanded 
Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) operations with associated 
infrastructure to

[[Page 42758]]

supplement springflows at Comal and San Marcos Springs during drought 
conditions. This alternative contemplated implementation of an HCP and 
issuance of an ITP for covered activities similar to the preferred 
alternative. This alternative incorporates many of the minimization and 
mitigation measures proposed under the preferred alternative. This 
alternative differs from the preferred alternative primarily in the 
mechanism by which enhanced springflows would be achieved. This 
alternative relies on storage of Aquifer water in underground ASR 
facilities located in Bexar and Wilson Counties during periods of 
normal or above-normal precipitation. These stored waters would then be 
pumped through water transmission pipelines during drought conditions 
to be injected into recharge features in Comal County to supplement 
springflows at Comal and San Marcos Springs. This alternative achieves 
similar simulated springflows at Comal and San Marcos Springs when 
modeled over the period of record as the preferred alternative, though 
the construction, operation, and maintenance of the infrastructure 
required to supplement springflows has the potential to negatively 
affect additional listed species within the project study area, and 
there are unanswered questions related to the effects to water quality 
of storage and reuse of Aquifer water.
    3. A third alternative contemplated regulatory approaches 
restricting region-wide Aquifer pumping to maintain springflows 
protective of the Covered Species. No HCP would be implemented under 
this alternative, and no ITP would be issued. Simulated springflows 
believed to be protective of the covered species during drought 
conditions could be maintained under this alternative, though the 
indirect and cumulative effects resulting from the proposed pumping 
restrictions and the costs associated with developing alternative water 
sources for human use would be expected to have significant negative 
socioeconomic impacts throughout the region. Because no ITP would be 
issued, the Applicants would continue to be subject to the take 
prohibitions of the ESA, and a project-by-project approach to 
mitigation of unavoidable impacts to listed species would be more time-
consuming, less efficient, and could result in an isolated independent 
mitigation approach that might be less beneficial to the covered 
species than the proposed regional permit.

Reviewing Documents

    You may obtain copies of the DEIS and DHCP on the Service's Web 
site at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/AustinTexas/ or the EARIP Web 
site at http://earip.org.
    Alternatively, you may obtain CD-ROMs with electronic copies of 
these documents by writing to Mr. Adam Zerrenner, Field Supervisor, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 200, Austin, 
TX 78758; calling 512/490-0057; or faxing 512/490-0974. A limited 
number of printed copies of the DEIS and DHCP are also available, by 
request, from Mr. Zerrenner. Copies of the DEIS and DHCP are also 
available for public inspection and review at the following locations, 
by appointment and written request only, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.:
     Department of the Interior, Natural Resources Library, 
1849 C. St., NW., Washington, DC 20240;
     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 500 Gold Avenue SW., Room 
6034, Albuquerque, NM 87102;
     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 10711 Burnet Road, Suite 
200, Austin, TX 78758.
    Persons wishing to review the application may obtain a copy by 
writing to the Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. 
Box 1306, Room 6034, Albuquerque, NM 87103.

Public Availability of Comments

    Written comments we receive become part of the public record 
associated with this action. Before including your address, phone 
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in 
your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including 
your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available 
at any time. While you can request in your comment that we withhold 
your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot 
guarantee that we will be able to do so. We will not consider anonymous 
comments. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from 
individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of 
organizations or businesses, will be made available for public 
disclosure in their entirety.

Authority

    We provide this notice under section 10(c) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22) and NEPA 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 
1506.6).

    Dated: June 7, 2012.
Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Acting Regional Director, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[FR Doc. 2012-17610 Filed 7-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P