Notice of Intent To Prepare a General Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, 35705 [05-12211]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 21, 2005 / Notices
Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS via
letter, email or fax. Attendees could also
leave written comments on comment
forms provided at the meetings.
The NPS contacted local, regional,
and national media outlets, issued press
releases that were faxed and emailed to
media outlets and phone calls that were
made to newspaper and news reporters
to generate interest in the plan. In
addition, paid newspaper
advertisements were placed in the
Mariposa Gazette, the Sierra Star
(Oakhurst, CA), the Union Democrat
(Sonora, CA), the Merced Sun-Star and
the Mammoth Times. Paid public
notices were placed in the San
Francisco Chronicle, the L.A. Times, the
Sacramento Bee, and the Fresno Bee.
Numerous stories about the plan and the
schedule of public meetings appeared in
local and regional newspapers. In
addition, several project fact sheets were
posted on the park’s Web site; fliers
were posted on community bulletin
boards, post offices, and local
businesses in communities where
public meetings were hosted; and press
release announcements were included
in the park’s Daily Report throughout
the entire comment period. The park
specifically initiated dialogue with
several interested local parties. These
included park employees and their
families, Delaware North Companies
Parks and Resorts at Yosemite (primary
concessioner) employees and residents,
and park partner staff such as the
Yosemite Institute, the Yosemite
Association, and The Yosemite Fund. In
addition, there was extensive outreach
within the local communities of El
Portal and Wawona through
participation at local Mariposa County
Planning Advisory Committee meetings.
The park also conducted a ‘‘walking
tour’’ in El Portal to discuss the process
for identifying Outstandingly
Remarkable Values within the El Portal
segment of the Merced River and the
rationale for the various El Portal
boundary alternatives. The NPS engaged
gateway communities throughout the
process through personal
communications and meetings between
the park staff and gateway community
members.
As a result of the public review
period, the NPS received comments
from 114 individuals, 25 organizations,
6 government agencies, 2 tribes and 1
university, including public testimony
given by individuals at public meetings.
Over 900 individual comments were
received. The analysis of these
comments generated about 400 concerns
statements, which were categorized and
considered for incorporation in the
planning process. The public comments
VerDate jul<14>2003
22:07 Jun 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
received and transcripts from the public
hearings are available for viewing on the
park Web site (https://www.nps.gov/
yose/planning/mrp/revision). The
Public Comment Analysis and Response
Report is included as Appendix F in the
Final SEIS.
Distribution of Final Revised Merced
River Plan/SEIS: A mail-back postcard
was sent to all individuals and
organizations on the park’s general
mailing list asking recipients if they
would like to receive a printed copy or
CD–ROM version (or both) of the Final
Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS. This
announcement also indicated that the
plan would be available for viewing on
the park’s Web site (https://
www.nps.gov/yose/planning). Copies of
the final plan will also be available at
the National Park Service headquarters
in Yosemite Valley, the Yosemite Valley
Research Library, the National Park
Service warehouse building in El Portal,
and at a number local and regional
libraries (listed in Chapter VI of the
Final SEIS).
Decision Process: Depending upon the
response from other agencies, interested
organizations, and the general public, at
this time it is anticipated that a Record
of Decision would be approved not
sooner than at least 30 days have
elapsed after publication by the EPA of
their filing notice for the Final Revised
MRP/SEIS. Notice of the approved
decision will be posted in the Federal
Register and announced in local and
regional media. As a delegated EIS, the
official responsible for the decision is
the Regional Director, Pacific West
Region, National Park Service;
subsequently the official responsible for
implementing the approved Revised
Merced River Plan is the
Superintendent, Yosemite National
Park.
Dated: May 18, 2005.
Jonathan B. Jarvis,
Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 05–12207 Filed 6–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Notice of Intent To Prepare a General
Management Plan and Environmental
Impact Statement
National Park Service, Interior.
Pursuant to section 102(2)(C)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969, the National Park
Service (NPS) announces its intent to
prepare a General Management Plan and
Environmental Impact Statement (GMP/
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35705
EIS) for Cedar Creek and Belle Grove
National Historical Park, located in
Frederick, Shenandoah, and Warren
Counties of Virginia. The park consists
of 3,000 acres that comprise significant
portions of the Cedar Creek Battlefield,
a decisive battle in the Civil War, and
Belle Grove Plantation, an antebellum
manor house listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. In the
enabling legislation for the park,
Congress established a Federal Advisory
Commission to advise in the preparation
of a GMP, and key partner organizations
who may continue to own and manage
properties within the park. Prepared by
planners at the park and in the NPS
Northeast Region, with assistance from
advisors and consultants, the GMP/EIS
will propose a long-term approach to
managing Cedar Creek and Belle Grove
National Historical Park.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Diann Jacox, Superintendent, Cedar
Creek and Belle Grove National
Historical Park, (540) 868–9176.
Consistent
with the park’s mission, NPS policy,
and other laws and regulations,
alternatives will be developed to guide
the management of the site over the next
15 to 20 years. The alternatives will
incorporate various zoning and
management prescriptions to ensure
resource protection and public
enjoyment of the site, and continued
involvement by the key partner
organizations. The environmental
consequences that could result from
implementing the various alternatives
will be evaluated in the GMP/EIS. The
public will be invited to express
opinions about the management of the
park early in the process through public
meetings and other media; and will
have an opportunity to review and
comment on the draft GMP/EIS. The
Advisory Commission and key partner
organizations will be involved early in
the planning process and will remain
actively involved throughout the
development of the plan. Following the
public review processes outlined under
NEPA, the final plan will become
official, authorizing implementation of a
preferred alternative. The target date for
the Record of Decision is October 8,
2008.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: June 2, 2005.
Diann Jacox,
Superintendent, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove
National Historical Park.
[FR Doc. 05–12211 Filed 6–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–52–M
E:\FR\FM\21JNN1.SGM
21JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 35705]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12211]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Notice of Intent To Prepare a General Management Plan and
Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, the National Park Service (NPS) announces
its intent to prepare a General Management Plan and Environmental
Impact Statement (GMP/EIS) for Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National
Historical Park, located in Frederick, Shenandoah, and Warren Counties
of Virginia. The park consists of 3,000 acres that comprise significant
portions of the Cedar Creek Battlefield, a decisive battle in the Civil
War, and Belle Grove Plantation, an antebellum manor house listed on
the National Register of Historic Places. In the enabling legislation
for the park, Congress established a Federal Advisory Commission to
advise in the preparation of a GMP, and key partner organizations who
may continue to own and manage properties within the park. Prepared by
planners at the park and in the NPS Northeast Region, with assistance
from advisors and consultants, the GMP/EIS will propose a long-term
approach to managing Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical
Park.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diann Jacox, Superintendent, Cedar
Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park, (540) 868-9176.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent with the park's mission, NPS
policy, and other laws and regulations, alternatives will be developed
to guide the management of the site over the next 15 to 20 years. The
alternatives will incorporate various zoning and management
prescriptions to ensure resource protection and public enjoyment of the
site, and continued involvement by the key partner organizations. The
environmental consequences that could result from implementing the
various alternatives will be evaluated in the GMP/EIS. The public will
be invited to express opinions about the management of the park early
in the process through public meetings and other media; and will have
an opportunity to review and comment on the draft GMP/EIS. The Advisory
Commission and key partner organizations will be involved early in the
planning process and will remain actively involved throughout the
development of the plan. Following the public review processes outlined
under NEPA, the final plan will become official, authorizing
implementation of a preferred alternative. The target date for the
Record of Decision is October 8, 2008.
Dated: June 2, 2005.
Diann Jacox,
Superintendent, Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park.
[FR Doc. 05-12211 Filed 6-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-M