[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 187 (Monday, September 28, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58232-58234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-24575]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Corps of Engineers, Department of the Army


Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 
for a Permit Application for Upper Llagas Creek Flood Protection 
Project in Santa Clara County, California

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI).

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), San Francisco 
District, has received a permit application for a Department of the 
Army permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) 
and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (33 U.S.C. 403) from the 
Santa Clara Valley Water Control District to construct flood conveyance 
features and to deepen and widen Upper Llagas Creek (Proposed Action). 
As part of the permit process, the Corps is evaluating the 
environmental effects associated with construction and implementation 
of these additional flood protection measures within the communities of 
Morgan Hill, San Martin, and Gilroy.
    The primary federal involvement associated with the Proposed Action 
is the discharge of fill material within federal jurisdictional areas 
and Waters of the United States and work within Navigable Waters of the 
United States. In addition, the Proposed Action could have potential 
significant effects on the human environment. Therefore, the Corps will 
prepare an EIS in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) to render a final decision on the Santa Clara Valley Water 
District's permit application. The Corps' decision will be to either 
issue or deny a Department of the Army permit for the Proposed Action. 
The Draft EIS is intended to be sufficient in scope to address federal, 
state, and local requirements and environmental issues concerning the 
Proposed Action and permit review.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions about the Proposed Action 
and Draft EIS should be directed to Mr. James Mazza, Corps Regulatory 
Project Manager, by telephone at (415) 503-6775 or by email at 
[email protected]. Written comments should be addressed to 
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco District, Regulatory 
Division, Attn: Mr. James Mazza, 1455 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94103-1398. Information about the Proposed Action and Draft 
EIS can also be obtained from the San Francisco District Web site at 
www.spn.usace.army.mil.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. Project Site and Background Information. 
The Proposed Action is located within the southern Santa Clara County, 
approximately 25 miles southeast of San Jose, in the communities of 
Morgan Hill and San Martin. The project consists of seven reaches (4, 
5, 6, 7A, 7B, 8, and 14) of Llagas Creek, East Little Llagas Creek, and 
West Little Llagas Creek above Buena Vista Avenue. The total length of 
the project area is approximately 13.1 miles; 6.1 miles of which are 
along the main branch of Llagas Creek, 3.3 miles along West Little 
Llagas Creek, and 2.4 miles along a tributary of Llagas Creek known as 
East Little Llagas Creek. An additional 1.3 miles of new diversion 
channel would be constructed along West Little Llagas Creek to Llagas 
Creek. On the north, the physical limits of the project are at the 
creek's intersection with Llagas Road on West Little Llagas Creek in 
Morgan Hill and in the south, the project limits area approximately 800 
feet below the creek's intersection with Buena Vista Avenue in Gilroy.
    (a) Background. In 1982 the first EIS for the Upper Llagas Project 
was prepared by the National Resources

[[Page 58233]]

Conservation Services (NRCS) as the lead agency. The downstream portion 
of the project, from the confluence with the Pajaro River to Buena 
Vista Avenue, was completed in 1996. However, due to the federal 
Endangered Species Act listing of steelhead trout in 1997, the changed 
environmental condition prompted an update to the existing 1982 EIS. 
NRCS was lacking funding to complete the upstream portion of the 
Project, so under the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, the 
project was transferred to the Corps to complete. Corps Civil Works 
hired an environmental consultant in 2007 to begin preparation of the 
current Project EIS.
    (b) Purpose and Need. The overall project purpose is to manage 
flood risk within the Upper Llagas Creek Watershed and provide flood 
protection for residents, businesses, and infrastructure in the City of 
Morgan Hill, community of San Martin, and the sphere of influence of 
the City of Gilroy. The Proposed Action would increase flood protection 
for up to a one percent flood exceedance event in the City of Morgan 
Hill (Reaches 8, 7A, and 7B); assure no additional flooding is induced 
on Llagas Creek by the upstream modifications along the reaches 
downstream from Morgan Hill (Reaches 6, 5, and 4), and provides a ten 
percent exceedance capacity for the semi-urban area along East Llagas 
Creek (Reach 14).
    (c) Proposed Action. The Santa Clara Valley Water District proposes 
44.82 acres of temporary impacts and 3.81 acres of permanent impacts to 
jurisdictional waters of the United States. Flood management features 
and proposed activities include widening and deepening the channel in 
all reaches; construction of an underground concrete tunnel beneath Nob 
Hill to bypass flood flows; construction of a sinuous low-flow channel, 
construction of access roads along the top of bank in all reaches; 
aquatic habitat enhancement in reaches 4, 5, 6, and 7A; installation of 
culverts at two tributary confluences within reach 6 and three 
tributary confluences in reach 14; construction of a 1.25-mile long 
earthen diversion channel on West Little Llagas Creek (reach 7A); 
exhuming of buried bridge crossings in reach 7A; replacement of 
culverts at four road crossing locations in reach 7B; and removal of a 
cinder block/brick wall at the upstream project limit and removal of 
sediment and debris for all culverts and beneath the Hillwood Lane 
bridge crossing in reach 8.
    2. Alternatives. Alternatives to the Proposed Action initially 
being considered include:
    (a) NRCS Alternative: The NRCS Alternative would provide an 
increased level of flood management for urban areas, specifically: 1 
percent flood in Morgan Hill (Reaches 8, 7A, and 7B); 10-percent flood 
management for the semi-urban area around East Little Llagas Creek 
(Reach 14); and, avoid induced flooding elsewhere on Llagas Creek 
(Reaches 6, 5, and 4) due to upstream improvements.
    (b) Culvert/Channel Alternative: The Culvert/Channel Alternative 
would eliminate the need for channel deepening and widening through 
residential properties, as proposed for the NRCS Alternative between 
West Main Avenue and West 2nd Street in Reach 8.
    (c) Reach 6 Bypass Alternative: The Reach 6 Bypass Alternative 
would construct a high flow bypass channel between Reach 6 of Llagas 
Creek and Reach 14 of East Little Llagas Creek. The bypass channel in 
Reach 6 would intersect with U.S. Highway 101. Therefore, construction 
of new bridges under the existing north and south bound lanes of the 
existing U.S. Highway 101 would be required to accommodate the bypass 
channel. A culvert would also be required under Murphy Road. Reach 14 
would need to be enlarged (deeper and wider) to a greater extent than 
under the other alternatives to maintain a 10-year flood capacity, 
while preventing induced flooding from the upstream improvements. The 
bypass would be designed so that no flood capacity improvements would 
be needed along the Llagas Creek section of Reach 6 downstream from the 
bypass channel or Reach 5. A hydraulic diversion structure would be 
required within Llagas Creek upstream to divert high flows into the 
bypass channel, and which would also allow the existing range of lower 
flows to continue downstream in Reach 6. In Reach 8 this alternative is 
exactly same as the design of the Tunnel Alternative, including the 
construction of a tunnel and the sediment detention basin.
    (d) No Action: The ``No Action'' alternative is one that results in 
no action requiring a Department of the Army permit.
    3. Draft EIS Scoping Process.
    (a) The Corps is furnishing this notice to: (1) Advise other 
Federal and state agencies, affected Tribes, and the public of our 
intentions; (2) announce the initiation of a 30-day scoping period; and 
(3) obtain suggestions and information on the scope of issues and 
alternatives to be included in the Draft EIS. The Corps invites 
comments from all interested parties to ensure that the full range of 
issues related to the permit request is addressed and that all 
significant issues are identified. We will accept written comments 
until 30 days after the date of publication of this notice.
    (b) Significant issues to be analyzed in the Draft EIS include: 
Aesthetics/visual quality, agricultural resources, air quality, 
biological resources, cultural resources, cumulative impacts, 
environmental justice, flood protection, geology/soils, growth 
inducement, land use/planning, noise/vibration, public health and 
safety, public services/utilities, recreation, socioeconomics, 
threatened and endangered species, traffic/circulation, water resources 
including wetlands, and other issues identified through scoping, public 
involvement, and interagency coordination.
    (c) The Corps will conduct an environmental review of the Proposed 
Action in accordance with the requirements of NEPA, 1969 as amended, 
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (40 Code of 
Federal Regulations, Section 1500 et seq.), Corps Procedures for 
Implementing NEPA (33 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 230 et 
seq.), and the NEPA Implementation Procedures for the Regulatory 
Program (Appendix B of 33 CFR part 325), as well as other appropriate 
federal laws and regulations, policies, and procedures of the Corps for 
compliance with those regulations. The Proposed Action, through the 
Corps permit review process, will require consultation under Section 7 
of the Endangered Species Act and Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act. Additionally, the proposed action would involve 
evaluation for compliance with the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines of the 
Clean Water Act; the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act; Water Quality Certification pursuant to Section 401 of 
the Clean Water Act; and certification of state lands, easements and 
right of ways.
    4. Scoping Workshops. Previous project scoping workshops were held 
on October 25, 2012 and on November 14, 2001 despite scoping workshops 
as being optional, but recommended. No additional scoping workshops are 
proposed for this Project.
    5. Availability of the Draft EIS. The Corps currently expects the 
Draft EIS to be made available to the public in December 2015. A public 
meeting will be held during the public comment period for the Draft 
EIS. Written comments will be accepted at the meeting.


[[Page 58234]]


    Dated: September 17, 2015.
Tori K. White,
Acting Chief, Regulatory Division.
[FR Doc. 2015-24575 Filed 9-25-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P