Final Environmental Impact Statement; Fire Management Plan for Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area; Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, CA; Notice of Availability, 76860-76862 [E5-7893]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
76860
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices
TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVES BY ANNUAL ACRES TREATED AND TREATMENT TYPE
Alternative A 1
Treatment type
County
Mechanical Treatment 2 ..................................
Marin ..............................................................
San Francisco ................................................
San Mateo ......................................................
75
5
20
180
10
40
225
10
40
Total ...............................................................
100
230
275
Marin ..............................................................
San Francisco ................................................
San Mateo ......................................................
100
<1
10
120
<1
0
285
<1
35
Total ...............................................................
110
120
320
Prescribed Fire ................................................
Alternative B
Alternative C
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Source: GGNRA Fire Management Office, 2004.
1 Estimated based upon current practice; the 1993 FMP did not specify number of acres per year per treatment type.
2 Includes fuel reduction by methods such as mowing, cutting, short-term grazing, or selective thinning.
The DEIS was made available at park
headquarters, visitor centers, and public
libraries in the area. Two public
presentations were made on the DEIS;
the first at a City of Pacifica regularly
scheduled City Council meeting on
April 11, 2005 and the second at the
regularly scheduled, bi-monthly
GGNRA public meeting on April 19,
2005. The public was encouraged to
submit comments on the DEIS via email,
fax, or regular mail.
The NPS received twelve written
comment letters and consultation letters
with findings from the State Historic
Preservation Officer on FMP
conformance to the National Historic
Preservation Act and from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service as required under
the Endangered Species Act. The
Environmental Protection Agency
provides the most comments, primarily
focused on air quality and related
matters. The letters and responses are
included in appendices of the FEIS. The
major issues raised during the public
comment period included: Smoke
management, clarification of the text on
conformance with air quality
regulations and the State
Implementation Plan, herbicide use,
structure of the EIS, protection of
riparian and wetland areas, range of
alternatives addressed, effects on
Monarch butterfly habitat, and the need
and benefits from interagency
cooperation.
Addresses: Copies of the FMP FEIS
may be obtained from the
Superintendent, Golden Gate National
Recreation Area, Fort Mason, Building
201, San Francisco, CA 94123, Attn:
Fire Management Plan, or by email
request to: goga_fire@nps.gov (please
mark the email subject line ‘‘FMP
FEIS’’). Printed copies of the FMP FEIS
or a copy on the FEIS on CD will be
directly distributed to those who
received the DEIS in these formats, and
to any others who request it. The FMP
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:37 Dec 27, 2005
Jkt 208001
FEIS will be available at park
headquarters, park visitor centers, and
at local and regional libraries. The
complete FMP FEIS will be posted on
the park’s Web site at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov/goga under the
heading for GOGA FMP FEIS.
Decision: As a delegated EIS, the
Regional Director of the Pacific West
Region is responsible for the final
decision on the selected FMP
alternative. A Record of Decision,
documenting the decision process in
selecting the final FMP, may be
considered by the Regional Director not
sooner than 30 days following the
publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency of their notice of
filing of the FMP FEIS in the Federal
Register. Following approval of the FMP
FEIS, the official responsible for
implementing the new FMP will be the
Superintendent of Golden Gate National
Recreation Area.
Dated: November 3, 2005.
George J. Turnbull,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. E5–7898 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–FN–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Final Environmental Impact Statement;
Fire Management Plan for Santa
Monica Mountains National Recreation
Area; Los Angeles and Ventura
Counties, CA; Notice of Availability
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C)
of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, as
amended), and the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations (40
CFR parts 1500–1508), the National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, has
prepared a Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) identifying and
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
evaluating four alternatives for a Fire
Management Plan for the Santa Monica
Mountains National Recreation Area
(SMMNRA). Potential impacts, and
appropriate mitigations, are assessed for
each alternative. When approved, the
plan will guide all future fire
management actions in the SMMNRA
for the next five years. The FEIS
documents the analysis of three action
alternatives and a ‘‘no action’’
alternative.
An updated fire management program
is needed to meet public safety, natural
and cultural resource management, and
wildland/urban interface protection
objectives in the federally managed
property of the SMMNRA. The ‘‘action’’
alternatives concentrate on wildland/
urban interface community protection
work and ecosystem protection, and
vary in their mix of treatments available
for completing work. The ‘‘no action’’
alternative describes the existing fire
management program, which the park
has not been able to effectively
implement to protect neighboring lives
and property. As a result, the risk of
catastrophic fire has increased in recent
decades.
Proposal and Alternatives
Considered: Alternative 2 (determined
to be the ‘‘environmentally preferred’’
alternative) is proposed for
implementation as the new Fire
Management Plan (FMP). Termed the
Mechanical Fuel Reduction/Ecological
Prescribed Fire/Strategic Fuels
Treatment alternative, it provides the
maximum potential environmental
benefits and minimizes the adverse
impacts of fire management actions.
Alternative 2 is the most flexible
alternative, utilizing all available fire
management strategies identified to be
appropriate in the Santa Monica
Mountains. Although strategic fuels
reduction has the potential for both
impacts and benefits in most of the
impact areas analyzed, individual
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices
strategic fuels reduction projects would
be evaluated for their potential risk:
benefit ratio. Work would be
accomplished with a combination of
NPS and other agency fire crews and by
contract.
Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative)
would continue the current NPS fire
and vegetation management program to
create a landscape mosaic of varying
aged chaparral stands through the
application of prescribed fire in separate
watersheds, minimizing brush
clearance. It should be noted that large
scale burning has not been feasible to
implement in accordance with the goals
of the previous Fire Management Plan
because of regulatory constraints on
prescribed fire, especially those relating
to air quality standards. Alternative 3
(Mechanical Fuel Reduction/Ecological
Prescribed Fire) relies exclusively on
prescribed burning to provide resource
enhancement including control of exotic
species and restoration of natural
communities. Mosaic burning is
eliminated. Fuel reduction is
concentrated at the wildland urban
interface to protect existing
development and emphasizes
mechanical or biomechanical fuel
modification. This alternative provides
effective protection of homes by
focusing mechanical fuel reduction at
the interface between homes and
wildland vegetation, and provides
ecological benefits from resource
prescribed burning. Alternative 4 (Only
Mechanical Fuel Reduction) relies
exclusively on mechanical or
biomechanical fuel modification at the
wildland urban interface. Prescribed fire
is eliminated. This alternative provides
effective protection of homes by
focusing mechanical fuel reduction at
the interface between homes and
wildland vegetation.
Alternatives Considered but Rejected:
Three additional alternatives were
considered but rejected from further
deliberation because the
interdisciplinary team determined that
they were not feasible for one or more
specific reasons. Alternative 5
(Suppression Only/No Vegetation
Manipulation) was found to be
inconsistent with NPS policies and
guidelines as well as with the objectives
of the SMMNRA fire management
program, and inadequate to protect
public safety. Alternative 6 (Mechanical
Fuel Reduction on a Landscape Level)
was also found to be inconsistent with
NPS policies and guidelines as well as
the objectives of the SMMNRA fire
management program. Alternative 7
(Wildland Fire Use) could be a threat to
public safety if implemented and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:37 Dec 27, 2005
Jkt 208001
logistically infeasible to implement
along the wildland-urban interface.
Planning Background: Public
outreach was initiated in June 2001
coinciding with a planning workshop
for agencies, cooperators and other
partners. A Notice of Scoping for an
environmental document was published
in the Federal Register March 26, 2002,
encouraging comments through an
extensive scoping period ending August
31, 2002. Four public scoping meetings
were hosted in Beverly Hills, Calabasas,
Malibu and Thousand Oaks, California.
Two additional meetings were held to
gain additional input on the preliminary
alternatives from fire agencies,
cooperators and other partners. Letters
were also sent to Native American
representatives, requesting their
comments and concerns related to
cultural activities, practices or
resources. Concerns raised in these
meetings included: how to provide for
public and firefighter safety; how to
optimize the effectiveness of fuels
treatments in the wildland-urban
interface for property protection and to
minimize impacts; the need to promote
operational and policy coordination
among all the agencies within the
SMMNRA, including consistent brush
clearance policies; the impact of fire
management activities including
suppression actions; containing the
spread of invasive plants and animals;
the use of prescribed fire for restoration
activities, and appropriate land use
planning. Based on the issues and
concerns raised it was determined that
an environmental impact statement
rather than an environmental
assessment would be completed. This
would allow sufficient analysis to be
undertaken in assessing the effects of
particular alternatives and to ensure
adequate involvement by the public and
interested agencies.
The distribution of Draft
environmental impact statement (DEIS)
for the FMP began in May, 2004.
Approximately 250 DEISs were
distributed; 85 went to local libraries, 20
were handed out at the SMMNRA
Visitor Center, and the remainder was
provided to individuals by mail or in
person at public meetings. A notice of
availability of the DEIS was published
in the Federal Register June 16, 2004,
providing an opportunity for public
review and comment through
September 15, 2004. In order to
facilitate public review and
understanding of the proposed plan,
four public meetings were held during
July, 2004 in Calabasas, Woodland Hills,
Malibu and Thousand Oaks, California.
The meetings were advertised through
the print media, on the SMMNRA
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
76861
website and via 350 invitations sent to
community leaders, neighborhood
organizations, local agencies and
stakeholder groups.
The NPS received a total of 25 written
responses, generated either from the
public meetings or from public notices.
All of these comments were duly
considered in finalizing in the FEIS.
Two main issues and concerns were
expressed by the respondents: that the
FEIS and FMP should prioritize public
and firefighter safety as well as the
protection of the unique Mediterranean
ecosystem which the SMMNRA was
established to protect. All alternatives
provide numerous provisions for public
and firefighter safety. Alternatives 2, 3
and 4 incorporate strong controls to
protect native flora and fauna,
minimizing the spread of invasive
grasses and forbs. The Environmental
Protection Agency expressed
environmental concerns due to
insufficient information. SMMNRA staff
consulted closely with the EPA in
preparing the FEIS. All comments and
responses are documented in Appendix
F of the FEIS.
Copies of the FEIS may be
obtained from the Superintendent,
Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area, 401 W. Hillcrest Drive,
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360, Attn: Fire
Management Plan, or by e-mail request
to: samo_fire@nps.gov (in the subject
line, type: Fire Management Plan). The
FEIS will be sent directly to those who
previously received the DEIS or who
have requested subsequently. The FEIS
will also be available at local libraries in
Agoura Hills, Beverly Hills, Calabasas,
Malibu, Oak Park, Oxnard, Santa
Monica, Thousand Oaks, Westlake
Village and selected locations in Los
Angeles; and at regional libraries in
Ventura County and selected locations
in Los Angeles County. A
comprehensive list of these locations, as
well as the document itself, is posted on
the park’s Web page (https://
www.nps.gov/samo/pphtml/
documents.html).
Decision: As a delegated EIS, the
official responsible for the final decision
is the Regional Director, Pacific West
Region; a Record of Decision may be
approved by the Regional Director not
sooner than 30 days after EPA’s
publication of the notice of filing of the
FEIS in the Federal Register. Notice of
the final decision will be also posted in
the Federal Register. Following
approval of the Fire Management Plan,
the official responsible for
implementation will be the
Superintendent, SMMNRA.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
76862
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices
Dated: November 3, 2005.
George J. Turnbull,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. E5–7893 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–FE–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Jackson Hole Airport Use Agreement
Extension, Environmental
Assessment, Grand Teton National
Park, WY
National Park Service,
Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Intent to prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the
Jackson Hole Airport Use Agreement
Extension, Grand Teton National Park.
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park
Service is preparing an Environmental
Assessment for the Jackson Hole Airport
Use Agreement Extension for Grand
Teton National Park, WY. This effort
addresses a request from the Jackson
Hole Airport Board to amend the use
agreement between the Department of
Interior and the Airport Board in order
to ensure that the airport remains
eligible for funding through the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA).
Alternatives to be considered include
Alternative 1: No Action—The airport
would continue operations under the
existing use agreement which currently
has an expiration date of April 27, 2033;
Alternative 2: Extend Agreement—
Jackson Hole Airport Board proposal to
extend the use agreement for an
additional two 10-year terms, bringing
the expiration date to April 27, 2053;
and Alternative 3: Update and Extend
Agreement—Extend the use agreement
for an additional two 10-year terms with
minor modifications as mutually agreed
to by the NPS and the Airport Board.
The Jackson Hole Airport is located
within Grand Teton National Park on
533 acres of land under the
administrative jurisdiction of the
National Park Service. The airport
operates under the terms and conditions
of a use agreement between the
Department of the Interior and the
Jackson Hole Airport Board. The
agreement, executed in 1983, was for a
primary term of 30 years, with options
for two 10-year extensions, both of
which have been exercised. The
agreement also includes a provision that
further extensions, amendments, or
modifications could be negotiated by
the parties on mutually satisfactory
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:37 Dec 27, 2005
Jkt 208001
terms, and that the parties agree that
upon expiration of the agreement, a
mutually satisfactory extension of the
agreement would be negotiated.
Since the FAA requires that the
airport have more than 20 years
remaining on its use agreement in order
to remain eligible for Airport
Improvement Program funds, an
extension of the use agreement is
needed to provide assurance that the
airport will remain eligible for funding
beyond the year 2013.
The National Park Service will
accept scoping comments from the
public through January 9, 2006.
DATES:
Information will be
available for public review and
comment online at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov, at Grand Teton
National Park Headquarters Visitor
Center in Moose, Wyoming, and at the
Reference Desk of the Teton County
Library in Jackson, Wyoming.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Margaret Wilson, Grand Teton National
Park, P.O. Drawer 170, Moose, Wyoming
83012–0170, (370) 739–3390,
margaret_wilson@nps.gov.
A scoping
brochure has been prepared that
describes the purpose and need for the
project and issues identified to date. A
copy of the brochure may be obtained at
one of the addresses described above. If
you wish to provide comments, you
may do so by any one of several
methods. You may mail comments to
the Superintendent Office, Attention:
Airport EA, P.O. Drawer 170, Moose,
Wyoming 83012–0170. You may
comment via the Internet at https://
parkplanning.nps.gov. Finally, you may
hand-deliver comments to the Grand
Teton National Park Headquarters
Visitor Center at Moose, Wyoming. Our
practice is to make comments, including
names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours.
Individual respondents may request that
we withhold their home address from
the record, which we will honor to the
extent allowable by law. There also may
be circumstances in which we would
withhold from the record a respondent’s
identity, as allowable by law. If you
wish us to withhold your address, you
must state this prominently at the
beginning of your comment. 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 inspection in their entirety.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: November 22, 2005.
Michael D. Snyder,
Acting Regional Director, Intermountain
Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. E5–7884 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–CX–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement for
the General Management Plan/
Wilderness Study, Sleeping Bear
Dunes National Lakeshore
National Park Service,
Department of the Interior.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4332 (2)(C), and the Wilderness
Act of 1964, 16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq., the
National Park Service (NPS) is preparing
an environmental impact statement
(EIS) for a general management plan/
wilderness study (GMP/WS) for
Sleeping Bear Dunes National
Lakeshore, Michigan. The EIS will be
approved by the Regional Director,
Midwest Region. This planning effort is
a new start, not a restart of the planning
effort that ended in 2002. With the
publication of this notice of intent, the
earlier planning effort has been
terminated.
The GMP will establish the overall
direction for the park, setting broad
management goals for managing the area
over the next 15 to 20 years. The plan
will prescribe desired resource
conditions and visitor experiences that
are to be achieved and maintained
throughout the park based on such
factors as the park’s purpose,
significance, special mandates, the body
of laws and policies directing park
management, resource analysis, and the
range of public expectations and
concerns. The plan also will outline the
kinds of resource management
activities, visitor activities, and
developments that would be appropriate
in the park in the future. The wilderness
study will evaluate portions of Sleeping
Bear Dunes National Lakeshore
(Lakeshore) for possible designation as
wilderness. The study will be included
as a part of the general management
plan.
A range of reasonable alternatives for
managing the Lakeshore will be
developed through this planning
process and will include, at a minimum,
a no-action and a preferred alternative.
Major issues the plan will address
include access to the Lakeshore,
wilderness, management of areas new to
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM
28DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76860-76862]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-7893]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Final Environmental Impact Statement; Fire Management Plan for
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area; Los Angeles and
Ventura Counties, CA; Notice of Availability
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended), and the Council on
Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the
National Park Service, Department of the Interior, has prepared a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) identifying and evaluating four
alternatives for a Fire Management Plan for the Santa Monica Mountains
National Recreation Area (SMMNRA). Potential impacts, and appropriate
mitigations, are assessed for each alternative. When approved, the plan
will guide all future fire management actions in the SMMNRA for the
next five years. The FEIS documents the analysis of three action
alternatives and a ``no action'' alternative.
An updated fire management program is needed to meet public safety,
natural and cultural resource management, and wildland/urban interface
protection objectives in the federally managed property of the SMMNRA.
The ``action'' alternatives concentrate on wildland/urban interface
community protection work and ecosystem protection, and vary in their
mix of treatments available for completing work. The ``no action''
alternative describes the existing fire management program, which the
park has not been able to effectively implement to protect neighboring
lives and property. As a result, the risk of catastrophic fire has
increased in recent decades.
Proposal and Alternatives Considered: Alternative 2 (determined to
be the ``environmentally preferred'' alternative) is proposed for
implementation as the new Fire Management Plan (FMP). Termed the
Mechanical Fuel Reduction/Ecological Prescribed Fire/Strategic Fuels
Treatment alternative, it provides the maximum potential environmental
benefits and minimizes the adverse impacts of fire management actions.
Alternative 2 is the most flexible alternative, utilizing all available
fire management strategies identified to be appropriate in the Santa
Monica Mountains. Although strategic fuels reduction has the potential
for both impacts and benefits in most of the impact areas analyzed,
individual
[[Page 76861]]
strategic fuels reduction projects would be evaluated for their
potential risk: benefit ratio. Work would be accomplished with a
combination of NPS and other agency fire crews and by contract.
Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative) would continue the current
NPS fire and vegetation management program to create a landscape mosaic
of varying aged chaparral stands through the application of prescribed
fire in separate watersheds, minimizing brush clearance. It should be
noted that large scale burning has not been feasible to implement in
accordance with the goals of the previous Fire Management Plan because
of regulatory constraints on prescribed fire, especially those relating
to air quality standards. Alternative 3 (Mechanical Fuel Reduction/
Ecological Prescribed Fire) relies exclusively on prescribed burning to
provide resource enhancement including control of exotic species and
restoration of natural communities. Mosaic burning is eliminated. Fuel
reduction is concentrated at the wildland urban interface to protect
existing development and emphasizes mechanical or biomechanical fuel
modification. This alternative provides effective protection of homes
by focusing mechanical fuel reduction at the interface between homes
and wildland vegetation, and provides ecological benefits from resource
prescribed burning. Alternative 4 (Only Mechanical Fuel Reduction)
relies exclusively on mechanical or biomechanical fuel modification at
the wildland urban interface. Prescribed fire is eliminated. This
alternative provides effective protection of homes by focusing
mechanical fuel reduction at the interface between homes and wildland
vegetation.
Alternatives Considered but Rejected: Three additional alternatives
were considered but rejected from further deliberation because the
interdisciplinary team determined that they were not feasible for one
or more specific reasons. Alternative 5 (Suppression Only/No Vegetation
Manipulation) was found to be inconsistent with NPS policies and
guidelines as well as with the objectives of the SMMNRA fire management
program, and inadequate to protect public safety. Alternative 6
(Mechanical Fuel Reduction on a Landscape Level) was also found to be
inconsistent with NPS policies and guidelines as well as the objectives
of the SMMNRA fire management program. Alternative 7 (Wildland Fire
Use) could be a threat to public safety if implemented and logistically
infeasible to implement along the wildland-urban interface.
Planning Background: Public outreach was initiated in June 2001
coinciding with a planning workshop for agencies, cooperators and other
partners. A Notice of Scoping for an environmental document was
published in the Federal Register March 26, 2002, encouraging comments
through an extensive scoping period ending August 31, 2002. Four public
scoping meetings were hosted in Beverly Hills, Calabasas, Malibu and
Thousand Oaks, California. Two additional meetings were held to gain
additional input on the preliminary alternatives from fire agencies,
cooperators and other partners. Letters were also sent to Native
American representatives, requesting their comments and concerns
related to cultural activities, practices or resources. Concerns raised
in these meetings included: how to provide for public and firefighter
safety; how to optimize the effectiveness of fuels treatments in the
wildland-urban interface for property protection and to minimize
impacts; the need to promote operational and policy coordination among
all the agencies within the SMMNRA, including consistent brush
clearance policies; the impact of fire management activities including
suppression actions; containing the spread of invasive plants and
animals; the use of prescribed fire for restoration activities, and
appropriate land use planning. Based on the issues and concerns raised
it was determined that an environmental impact statement rather than an
environmental assessment would be completed. This would allow
sufficient analysis to be undertaken in assessing the effects of
particular alternatives and to ensure adequate involvement by the
public and interested agencies.
The distribution of Draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for
the FMP began in May, 2004. Approximately 250 DEISs were distributed;
85 went to local libraries, 20 were handed out at the SMMNRA Visitor
Center, and the remainder was provided to individuals by mail or in
person at public meetings. A notice of availability of the DEIS was
published in the Federal Register June 16, 2004, providing an
opportunity for public review and comment through September 15, 2004.
In order to facilitate public review and understanding of the proposed
plan, four public meetings were held during July, 2004 in Calabasas,
Woodland Hills, Malibu and Thousand Oaks, California. The meetings were
advertised through the print media, on the SMMNRA website and via 350
invitations sent to community leaders, neighborhood organizations,
local agencies and stakeholder groups.
The NPS received a total of 25 written responses, generated either
from the public meetings or from public notices. All of these comments
were duly considered in finalizing in the FEIS. Two main issues and
concerns were expressed by the respondents: that the FEIS and FMP
should prioritize public and firefighter safety as well as the
protection of the unique Mediterranean ecosystem which the SMMNRA was
established to protect. All alternatives provide numerous provisions
for public and firefighter safety. Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 incorporate
strong controls to protect native flora and fauna, minimizing the
spread of invasive grasses and forbs. The Environmental Protection
Agency expressed environmental concerns due to insufficient
information. SMMNRA staff consulted closely with the EPA in preparing
the FEIS. All comments and responses are documented in Appendix F of
the FEIS.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the FEIS may be obtained from the Superintendent,
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area, 401 W. Hillcrest
Drive, Thousand Oaks, CA 91360, Attn: Fire Management Plan, or by e-
mail request to: samo_fire@nps.gov (in the subject line, type: Fire
Management Plan). The FEIS will be sent directly to those who
previously received the DEIS or who have requested subsequently. The
FEIS will also be available at local libraries in Agoura Hills, Beverly
Hills, Calabasas, Malibu, Oak Park, Oxnard, Santa Monica, Thousand
Oaks, Westlake Village and selected locations in Los Angeles; and at
regional libraries in Ventura County and selected locations in Los
Angeles County. A comprehensive list of these locations, as well as the
document itself, is posted on the park's Web page (https://www.nps.gov/
samo/pphtml/documents.html).
Decision: As a delegated EIS, the official responsible for the
final decision is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region; a Record
of Decision may be approved by the Regional Director not sooner than 30
days after EPA's publication of the notice of filing of the FEIS in the
Federal Register. Notice of the final decision will be also posted in
the Federal Register. Following approval of the Fire Management Plan,
the official responsible for implementation will be the Superintendent,
SMMNRA.
[[Page 76862]]
Dated: November 3, 2005.
George J. Turnbull,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. E5-7893 Filed 12-27-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-FE-P
