[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 78 (Wednesday, April 23, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22618-22622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09215]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Enoree Ranger District; South Carolina; Chester County Stream and 
Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: The Chester County Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement 
Project will involve restoring and enhancing the hydrologic, riparian 
and aquatic functions within four watersheds located on National Forest 
System (NFS) lands in Chester County, S.C., and help meet the stream 
restoration goals outlined in the 2004 Revised Land and Resource 
Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Forest Plan). More 
specifically, the Project Area is located along the western most 
portion of Chester County, approximately two miles south of Lockhart, 
and is bounded by the Broad River to the west and Hwy. SC 49 to the 
east. It includes four watersheds: Clarks Creek, Little Turkey Creek, 
McCluney Branch and an unnamed tributary to Clarks Creek. Restoration 
work will be accomplished through the use of the following stream 
restoration design approaches: Floodplain reconnection (FR) (also known 
as a Rosgen Priority 1), floodplain excavation (FE) (also known as a 
Rosgen Priority 2), and floodplain benches (FB) (also known as a Rosgen 
Priority 3). Selection of a restoration approach is made for each 
stream segment based on individual stream and floodplain conditions, 
and a combination of approaches is typically employed within an 
individual watershed to meet site conditions. Approximately 18 miles of 
streams are proposed for restoration.

DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received 
by May 23, 2014. The draft environmental impact statement is expected 
July 2014

[[Page 22619]]

and the final environmental impact statement is expected November 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to USDA Forest Service, 4931 Broad 
River Road, Columbia, SC 29212. Comments may also be sent via email to 
[email protected], or via facsimile to 
803-561-4004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Evans ([email protected]), 
864-427-9858.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose and Need for Action

    The purpose and need for this Project is to restore and enhance the 
hydrologic and aquatic functions within four watersheds (Project Area) 
located upon lands of the Sumter National Forest in Chester County, SC. 
Hereinafter in this Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), ``restore'' 
is used synonymously with ``rehabilitate''. This change in condition 
would restore riparian functions and help move the current stream 
systems toward stability and reestablishment of natural stream and 
related habitat forming processes. This may include, but not be limited 
to, restoring the hydrologic regime including reconnecting streams to 
their respective floodplains, reducing sedimentation and stabilizing 
banks, improving in-stream and riparian habitats, and improving water 
quality.
    In 2010, the United States Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) 
approached the Forest Service about the potential for completing 
compensatory mitigation projects upon National Forest System lands. The 
Corps' Final Mitigation Rule (the Rule) requires that compensatory 
mitigation be completed within or immediately adjacent to the watershed 
where the impacts are occurring. The Enoree Ranger District is 
geographically located within the Lower Broad, Enoree and Tyger sub-
basins (8-digit Hydrologic Unit Codes (HUC)), making it within the 
primary service area for projects in Greenville, Spartanburg and 
possibly the greater Charlotte metro area. There is high demand for 
compensatory mitigation in these HUCs, while currently no private 
mitigation banks are serving them. The Rule also clarifies that public 
lands are appropriate for use in completion of compensatory mitigation 
projects, provided a land management plan is in place to enable long-
term protection and management of the mitigation property.
    Stream restoration is a primary goal of the Forest Service's 2004 
Revised Land and Resource Management Plan (Plan) and the Plan includes 
multiple objectives designed to restore and enhance stream habitat and 
aquatic communities within the Project Area streams. The Forest Service 
and Corps have entered into a regional Conservation Land Use Agreement 
that sets forth the policies, undertakings, and responsibilities 
governing the use of Sumter National Forest lands for compensatory 
mitigation projects required or authorized under the Corp's permit 
program. In May 2011, the Forest Service began discussions with the 
Corps and Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) regarding the 
potential for a compensatory mitigation project to be completed on the 
Enoree Ranger District. The project would be used to offset the impacts 
associated with Duke Energy's construction of a drought contingency 
reservoir for the proposed Lee Nuclear Station in Cherokee County, SC.
    It is the intent of this EIS to identify those watersheds within 
the analysis area that may benefit from restoration and enhancement, 
and to provide the required documentation so that they may be 
considered for future use as compensatory mitigation properties.

Background

    The Project Area is located along the western most portion of 
Chester County, South Carolina, approximately 2 miles south of 
Lockhart. The Project Area is bounded by the Broad River to the west 
and Highway SC-49 to the east. The potential restoration work to be 
completed within the Project Area includes approximately 18 miles of 
streams within four watersheds: Clarks Creek, Little Turkey Creek, 
McCluney Branch, and an unnamed tributary to Clarks Creek.
    Native Americans moved into the Broad River valley about 12,000 
years ago. Their populations remained relatively low throughout their 
occupation and their impact on the environment was limited. Small 
groups of European settlers first moved into the project area in the 
1750s.They were primarily farmers who cultivated level terrain along 
the major streams and rivers. An influx of settlement followed the 
American Revolution with these settlers moving into the uplands. Cotton 
agriculture started in the early 1800's and continued as the main 
staple crop in the Piedmont until the early 1900's. Extensive tracts of 
erosion prone land were cleared for cultivation. Fields that were 
allowed to lay fallow after the growing season were soon subjected to 
sheet erosion which quickly became gullies. When federal acquisition 
began in the 1930s, the South Carolina Piedmont was one of the most 
severely eroded regions in the United States (SNF Cultural Resources 
Overview 2006). Sediment covers Piedmont stream valleys in varying 
depths up to several feet and has inundated once pristine stream and 
wetland systems (SNF Component Final Mitigation Plan 2012). Streams 
within the Project Area reflect past land management practices that 
have led to the deteriorated conditions and reduced stream function.
    Past land abuses as described above within the Project Area have 
led to deeply incised streambeds that are subject to reduced floodplain 
interactions and ongoing water quality and aquatic habitat degradation 
(Forest Service 2004). Streams are incised and disconnected from an 
active floodplain, which exacerbates in-stream channel erosion and 
further down-cutting, and substantially limits the hydrologic, 
physical, chemical, and biological function that would likely occur 
when a stream has access to its floodplain.

Forest Goals and Objectives

    This proposal is consistent with the 2004 Revised Land and Resource 
Management Plan, Sumter National Forest (Plan) that provides goals and 
objectives for the Project Area.
    Restoring and enhancing the historic hydrologic and aquatic 
functions in the Project Area would help meet the following goals and 
objectives in the Plan.
    Goal 1 Watersheds are managed (and where necessary restored) to 
provide resilient and stable conditions to ensure the quality and 
quantity of water necessary to protect ecological functions and support 
intended beneficial water uses.
     Objective 1.01--Improve soil and water conditions on 1,500 
acres through stabilization or rehabilitation of actively eroding areas 
such as gullies, barren areas, abandoned roads or trails, and unstable 
stream banks over the 10-year planning period.
    Goal 2 Manage in-stream flows and water levels, by working with 
other agencies if possible, to protect stream processes, aquatic and 
riparian habitats and communities, and recreation and aesthetic values.
     Objective 2.01--The in-stream flows needed to protect 
stream processes, aquatic and riparian habitats and communities, and 
recreation and aesthetic values will be determined on 50 streams.

[[Page 22620]]

    Goal 3 Riparian ecosystems, wetlands, and aquatic systems are 
managed (and where necessary restored) to protect and maintain their 
physical, chemical, and biological integrity.
    Goal 4 Maintain or restore natural aquatic and riparian communities 
or habitat conditions in amounts, arrangements, and conditions to 
provide suitable habitats for riparian dependent and migratory species, 
especially aquatic species including fish, amphibians, and water birds 
within the planning area. Perennial and intermittent streams are 
managed in a manner that emphasizes and recruits large woody debris.
     Objective 4.01--Create and maintain dense understory of 
native vegetation on 1-5 percent of the total riparian corridor acreage 
during the 10-year planning period.
    Goal 6 Cooperate with landowners and other partners to address 
watershed needs and participate in efforts to identify stream problems, 
watershed planning, BMP (Best Management Practice(s)) and Total Maximum 
Daily Load (TMDL) implementation with the South Carolina Department of 
Health and Environmental Control, South Carolina Forestry Commission 
and other agencies.
    Goal 9 Provide habitats to sustain the diversity and distribution 
of resident reptile and amphibian species as well as breeding, 
wintering, and migration staging and stopover habitat for migratory 
birds in ways that contributes to their long-term conservation.
    Goal 11:
     Objective 2--Restore and enhance stream habitat and 
aquatic communities in 50 miles of streams. This includes woody debris, 
stream bank stabilization, brook trout restoration, and in stream 
habitat improvement.
    Goal 14 Manage forest ecosystems and associated communities to 
maintain or restore composition, structure, function and productivity 
over time.

Proposed Action

    The Proposed Action is to restore and enhance the hydrologic and 
aquatic functions on approximately 18 miles of streams within the 
Project Area's four watersheds, namely McCluney Branch, Little Turkey 
Creek, Clarks Creek, and an unnamed tributary to Clarks Creek). The 
Proposed Action represents an effort to restore ecosystem functions 
across multiple watersheds and at a landscape-scale, which when 
completed would provide regionally-significant ecological benefits.
    To accomplish the restoration work, the following restoration 
design approaches would be used: Floodplain reconnection (FR), 
floodplain excavation (FE), and floodplain benches (FB). The stream 
restoration approaches are summarized in Table 1; definitions for the 
design approaches are provided in Table 2.
    Selection of a restoration approach is made for each stream segment 
based on individual stream and floodplain conditions, and a combination 
of approaches is typically employed within an individual watershed to 
meet site conditions. An understanding of the approach can be used to 
generally describe the project footprint, the amount of excavation and 
fill material needed to complete the work, and the ecological outcome 
of the proposed project. Implementation would ultimately require more 
detailed designs that identify specific construction details (e.g., 
channel patterns, longitudinal profiles, cross-sections, in-stream 
channel structures for aquatic species habitat (e.g., large wood, rock 
substrate), substrate modifications, planting native vegetation, and 
restoration of work areas). The proposed stream restoration approaches 
for the various stream reaches are identified in Table 1.

                                  Table 1--Summary of the Proposed Restoration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Restoration
                    Stream                         length*                    Restoration approach
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McCluney Branch..............................             3.1  Floodplain Reconnection.
                                                               Floodplain Excavation.
Little Turkey Creek..........................             4.6  Floodplain Reconnection.
                                                               Floodplain Excavation.
Clarks Creek.................................             7.0  Floodplain Reconnection.
                                                               Floodplain Excavation.
                                                               Floodplain Benches.
Unnamed Tributary to Clarks Creek............             3.1  Floodplain Benches
                                                               Floodplain Excavation.
                                              ----------------
    Total Length.............................            17.9  .................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Approximate lengths.

    For the four watersheds, the restoration would include a variety of 
methods to return natural channel form, floodplain function and habitat 
conditions. Restoration would involve some earthmoving and shaping of 
the channel and floodplain and to the extent possible, soil borrow and 
disposal areas would occur within these small watersheds. Activities 
would include some temporary roads and repair or replacement of 
facilities such as roads, culverts and bridges. Other restoration 
activities would involve some removal of trees and vegetation to 
accommodate the restoration work. Stream restoration would include 
planting native tree, shrub, and herbaceous vegetation to help 
stabilize the stream banks and adjacent areas, provide habitat 
improvements and to speed recovery within the areas temporarily 
disturbed by construction activities. Mitigation measures would be 
chosen to accelerate stabilization rates to limit erosion and restore 
native forest and vegetation types.
     McCluney Branch: Proposed activities for restoration 
within McCluney Branch include floodplain reconnection and floodplain 
excavation. A hybrid restoration approach would be used in smaller 
drainage areas to create a wetland/intermittent stream complex with 
little or no defined stream channels, similar to what was historically 
present in these areas. Restoration would involve some earthmoving and 
shaping of the floodplain, including the use of soil borrowed from 
areas both within and potentially outside of the watershed. In the 
lower portion of McCluney Branch, floodplain excavation would be used 
to transition the stream bed to the existing

[[Page 22621]]

elevation of the stream near Broad River.
     Little Turkey Creek: The floodplain excavation approach 
would be used in the upstream part of the watershed, and then the 
floodplain reconnection approach would be used in the middle part of 
the watershed. Floodplain excavation would be used to transition the 
restored channel back into the existing stream channel in the lower 
portion of the watershed. Restoration would involve some earthmoving 
and shaping of the floodplain, including the use of soil borrowed from 
areas both within and potentially outside of the watershed. Also, some 
additional structural diversity such as boulders and cobble rock may be 
added to a portion of the newly created stream channel.
     Clarks Creek: All three restoration approaches (i.e., 
floodplain reconnection, floodplain excavation, and floodplain benches) 
would be used to restore Clarks Creek. The upstream portions of Clarks 
North Fork tributary would begin with the floodplain excavation, 
transitioning quickly to the floodplain reconnection approach below the 
first tributary stream; this tributary stream would have a short 
section of floodplain reconnection in its headwaters. Downstream of 
this area, the floodplain reconnection approach would be used before 
reaching a short segment where no restoration is proposed. The approach 
for the middle sections of Clark Creek would transition from floodplain 
excavation down into floodplain reconnection along the mainstem of 
Clarks Creek, where the approach would have a final transition back to 
floodplain excavation so that the stream can tie into the existing 
stream bed. Within the Clarks South Fork tributary, the stream would 
transition from floodplain reconnection to floodplain excavation, and 
then through a short segment adjacent to the Project Area boundary that 
would be restored using the floodplain bench approach. The downstream 
area would then transition from floodplain excavation back to 
floodplain reconnection, as it joins the mainstem at the confluence 
with Clarks North Fork. Restoration would involve extensive earthmoving 
and shaping of the floodplain, including both the use of borrowed soil 
and disposal of excess soil to areas outside of the floodplain.
     Unnamed Tributary to Clarks Creek: The Unnamed Tributary 
to Clarks Creek would be restored using the floodplain benches approach 
as well as floodplain excavation in localized sections. Restoration 
activities proposed on this stream would be targeted to key problem 
areas to help augment natural channel changes the stream is undergoing 
as it moves toward greater stability. Restoration would involve 
moderate to extensive earthmoving and shaping of the floodplain in key 
areas, including both the use of borrowed soil and disposal of excess 
soil to areas outside of the floodplain. To the extent possible, soil 
borrow and disposal areas would occur within watershed.
Forest Service Plan Amendment
    The proposed action includes a non-significant forest plan 
amendment to the Revised Land and Resource Management Plan, Sumter 
National Forest (Forest Plan). The amendment would change current 
Forest Plan management direction to allow for implementation 
(construction, reconstruction and maintenance) of the Chester County 
Stream and Riparian Restoration/Enhancement Project (stream restoration 
project) in project streams only.
    Proposed Forest Plan changes would:
    1. Allow heavy equipment within project stream channels during 
implementation and maintenance activities.
    2. Allow removal of trees and other vegetation on project stream 
banks during implementation and maintenance activities.
    3. Allow removal of hardwood inclusions (\1/2\ acre in size or 
larger) in pine stands dominated by hard and soft mast species where 
needed during implementation activities.
    4. Allow removal of trees in areas with old growth characteristics 
where necessary during implementation of the steam restoration project.
    5. Allow removal of healthy shortleaf pine in areas where necessary 
during implementation of the steam restoration project.
    6. Allow stream restoration project work to take place on plastic 
soils with approval of the forest soil scientist on a case-by-case 
basis.
    7. In the short term, change the scenic integrity objective for 
stream restoration work to moderate in management prescriptions 6.C, 
7.D, 7.E.1, 7.E.2, 9.A.3, 9F, and 11 in the project area to allow the 
restoration work to be completed.
    8. Allow temporary removal of large woody material during 
restoration and maintenance work.
    9. Allow minimal impacts to rare communities during stream 
restoration and maintenance work.
Connected Actions
    The following activities would be conducted in connection with 
stream restoration and enhancement activities.
     Road Reconstruction and Maintenance: Road maintenance and/
or reconstruction would be needed on existing Forest Service system 
roads. Reconstruction work would consist of but not be limited to 
graveling road surfaces, replacing culverts--including replacements for 
aquatic organism passage, ditch cleaning, removing brush and trees 
along road rights-of-way, installing, repairing or replacing gates and 
correcting road safety hazards. Bridge replacements may be necessary on 
some roads to accommodate the restored stream. Road maintenance would 
consist of spot gravel replacement, blading, cleaning culverts, light 
brushing and mowing.
     Temporary Roads: Stream restoration work would require the 
construction of temporary roads during project implementation work. 
Upon completion of restoration activities, temporary roads would be 
closed, obliterated and adequate erosion and stormwater control 
measures completed. Road surfaces would be replanted with native and 
desirable non-native vegetation.
     Soil Borrow and Soil Deposition Areas: Implementation of 
the project would generate the need for soil borrow to fill in and 
shape the new channels and adjacent areas. Likewise, sediment deposited 
by past land erosion would be removed in some locations, generating 
soil that would need to be deposited elsewhere. Soil borrow and 
deposition areas would be established on national forest system lands 
within the project area and transported to the stream restoration areas 
as needed.
     Merchantable Timber: The project would result in the 
removal of trees within the stream restoration areas and from the soil 
borrow and deposition areas. Merchantable timber would likely be sold. 
Some of the woody material would be utilized in the restoration work. 
Trees would be cut down and skidded to landings where it would be 
transported off site or used in the restoration work. All landings and 
skid trails would be closed, water-barred, and reseeded.

[[Page 22622]]



            Table 2--Stream Restoration Methods--Definitions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Restoration approach (based on
           Rosgen, 1997)                Terms and definitions for EIS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Floodplain Reconnection (FR)......   Raise the streambed and use
                                     the existing valley elevation as
                                     the floodplain.
                                     Create a meandering stable
                                     channel on existing forest bottom
                                     with alternating riffle and pool
                                     bed forms.
                                     Small headwater streams may
                                     have a small step-pool channel or
                                     swale.
                                     Fill/plug sections of old
                                     stream channel and create oxbow
                                     ponds and wetlands; may include the
                                     use of groundwater dams.
Floodplain Excavation (FE)........   Excavate, at the stream's
                                     existing bankfull elevation, a new
                                     floodplain that is wide enough to
                                     support a meandering channel. The
                                     stream bed elevation remains nearly
                                     the same.
                                     Create or allow for the
                                     natural development of a meandering
                                     channel with alternating riffle and
                                     pool bed forms.
Floodplain Benches (FB)...........   Constraints in the stream
                                     corridor will not support a
                                     meandering channel.
                                     Excavate relatively narrow,
                                     floodplain benches at the stream's
                                     existing bankfull elevation.
                                     Create a relatively
                                     straight channel that dissipates
                                     energy through a step-pool bed form
                                     rather than a meandering stream.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosgen. D.L. 1997. A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised
  Rivers. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes
  Disturbed by Channel Incision, S.S.Y Wang, E.J. Langendoen, & F.D.
  Shields (Editors). University of Mississippi. Oxford.

    To view project vicinity, location map and more detailed 
information about proposed treatments go to: http://www.fs.fed.us/nepa/nepa_project_exp.php?project=44310.

Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The United States Army, Corps of Engineers--Regulatory Division, 
Charleston District, Charleston, South Carolina will be a cooperating 
agency on this project.

Responsible Official

    The Forest Supervisior for the Francis Marion/Sumter National 
Forests.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    Whether or not to implement the action as proposed or an 
alternative way to achieve the desired outcome.

Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides 
the development of the environmental impact statement. A public scoping 
meeting will be held in Chester County at the West Chester Community 
Center, located at 2684 West Chester School Road, Chester, SC 29706 on 
April 28, 2014 from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
    It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times 
and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of 
the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be 
provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly 
articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions.
    Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names 
and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record 
for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will also be 
accepted and considered, however.

    Dated: April 17, 2014.
Robin Mackie,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2014-09215 Filed 4-22-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P