Final Environmental Impact Statement for Fire Management Plan; Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Muir Woods National Monument and Fort Point National Historic Site; Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties, CA; Notice of Availability, 76858-76860 [E5-7898]

Download as PDF 76858 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices Dated: December 21, 2005. Mark Limbaugh, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. [FR Doc. 05–24579 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service National Park Service Oil and Gas Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Big Thicket National Preserve, Texas Final Environmental Impact Statement for Fire Management Plan; Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Muir Woods National Monument and Fort Point National Historic Site; Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties, CA; Notice of Availability National Park Service, Department of the Interior. AGENCY: National Park Service Minor Boundary Revision at Antietam National Battlefield National Park Service, Interior. Announcement of park boundary revision. AGENCY: Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Oil and Gas Management Plan, Big Thicket National Preserve. ACTION: ACTION: SUMMARY: Notice is given that the boundary of Antietam National Battlefield has been revised pursuant to the Acts as specified below, to encompass lands depicted on Drawing 302/92500, Segment 05, Antietam National Battlefield, revised July 1, 2005, prepared by the National Park Service. The revision to the boundary includes Tract Number 05–171, as depicted on the map. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent, Antietam National Battlefield, P.O. Box 158, Sharpsburg, Maryland 21782–0158. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act of August 30, 1890 (26 Stat. 401) authorized surveying, locating and preserving the lines of battle of the Army of the Potomac and of the Army of Northern Virginia at Antietam. Sections 7(c) (1)(i) and 7(c) (1)(ii) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act, as amended by the Act of June 10, 1977 (Pub. L. 95–42, 91 Stat. 210), and the Act of March 10, 1980 (Pub. L. 103–333, 110 Stat. 4194) further authorized the Secretary of Interior to make minor revisions in the boundaries whenever the Secretary determines that it is necessary for the preservation, protection, interpretation or management of an area. The map is on file and available for inspection in the Land Resources Program Center, National Capital Regional Office, 1100 Ohio Drive, SW., Washington, DC 20242, and in the Offices of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, Washington DC 20013–7127. wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES Dated: August 22, 2005. Joseph M. Lawler, Regional Director, National Capital Region. Editorial Note: This document was received in the Office of the Federal Register on December 22, 2005. [FR Doc. E5–7889 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability of a final Environmental Impact Statement for the Oil and Management Plan, for Big Thicket National Preserve, Texas. The National Park Service will execute a Record of Decision (ROD) no sooner than 30 days following publication by the Environmental Protection Agency of the Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. DATES: Information will be available for public inspection online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov, in the office of the Superintendent, Big Thicket National Preserve, 3785 Milam Street, Beaumont, Texas 77701–4724, 409–951–6801, and at the following locations: ADDRESSES: Planning and Environmental Quality, Intermountain Region, National Park Service, 12795 W. Alameda Parkway, Lakewood, CO 80228, Telephone: 303–969–2851. Office of Minerals/Oil and Gas Support, Intermountain Region, National Park Service, 1100 Old Santa Fe Trail, Santa Fe, NM 87505, Telephone: 505– 988–6095. Office of Public Affairs, National Park Service, Department of the Interior, 18th and C Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20240, Telephone: 202–208–6843. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Superintendent, Big Thicket National Preserve, at the above address and telephone number. Dated: December 8, 2005. Michael D. Snyder, Acting Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service. [FR Doc. E5–7885 Filed 12–27–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P BILLING CODE 4312–58–P VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:37 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Summary: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, 42 U.S.C. 4321–4347, January 1, 1970, as amended), and the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR part 1500–1508), the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement for an new Fire Management Plan for Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), Muir Woods National Monument and Fort Point National Historic Site—the latter two parks being under the administration of GGNRA. The Fire Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) evaluates fire management options for approximately 15,000 acres of GGNRA’s nearly 75,000 legislated acres in Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties. The Fire Management Plan FEIS describes and analyzes three alternative strategies to replace the 1993 GGNRA Fire Management Plan with a plan that conforms to current Federal wildland fire management policy and National Park Service (NPS) management policies. Potential impacts and mitigating measures are described for the two action alternatives and a no action alternative. The alternative selected after this conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process will serve as a blueprint for fire management actions for the GGNRA over the next 10–15 years. The FEIS fire planning and analysis area does not include the following lands: 1. The northern lands of GGNRA, comprising 18,000 acres north of the Bolinas-Fairfax Road in western Marin County, which are managed by Point Reyes National Seashore under an agreement between the two park units. Fire management responsibilities for these northern lands are addressed in the Point Reyes FMP (approved October 29, 2004). 2. Lands within the jurisdictional boundary of GGNRA that are not directly managed by the National Park Service. This includes the San Francisco Watershed, managed by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (with overlays of NPS easements) and E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1 wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 248 / Wednesday, December 28, 2005 / Notices the interior portion of the Presidio of San Francisco which is managed by the Presidio Trust, a Federal corporation. The coastal portion of the Presidio managed by the GGNRA, is included in the planning area. In addition to lands currently under the management of the NPS, the subject FMP planning area includes those lands within the legislative boundary that may pass to NPS management in the near future. These areas, all in San Mateo County, include Cattle Hill and Pedro Point. Purpose and Need for Federal Action: The 1993 FMP for GGNRA focused primarily on natural resource management issues and needs to be updated to more fully address cultural resource concerns, provide guidance for parklands acquired since 1993, and provide more guidance on effectively reducing fire risk along wildland urban interface (WUI) areas in the park. The new FMP is needed to reflect the emphasis of recent years on fuel reduction projects that effectively reduce wildfire risk to natural and cultural park resources and to private property along the WUI zone. In addition, the new FMP will address the role that fire management actions can have on ecosystem changes to parklands such as the spread of more flammable, invasive, nonnative plant species, dense second-growth forests with high fuel loads, conversion of plant community type in the absence of wildland fire, alteration of important cultural landscapes through overgrowth of vegetation, and the decline of certain fire-adapted plant species. The FMP will provide a framework for all fire management activities in a manner responsive to natural and cultural resource objectives while reducing risks to developed facilities and adjacent communities and providing for public and staff safety. The purposes of this conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process are: • To prepare a new FMP that is consistent with Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy and conforms to agency guidelines for fire management plans and programs; and • To help achieve resource management objectives consistent with the park’s cultural resource, natural resource, and land management plans, and to be responsive to safety considerations for park visitors, employees, and resources. VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:37 Dec 27, 2005 Jkt 208001 Proposed Fire Management Plan. Alternative C is the alternative preferred by the NPS and has also been determined by the NPS to be the ‘‘environmentally preferred’’ alternative. The three FMP EIS alternatives differ in the number of acres proposed for treatment through prescribed burning or mechanical treatments in the park interior versus the outer parklands that border residential development in the WUI zone. Each alternative has an upper limit set on the number of acres that could be treated annually as shown in Table 1. Alternative C allows for the greatest number of acres to be treated on an annual basis to achieve fire management and resource objectives through the use of a broad range of fire management strategies. Mechanical treatment and prescribed burning would be used throughout the park as a means to reduce fuel loading and achieve resource enhancement goals. Mechanical treatments, complemented by prescribed fire, would be employed to assist with restoration and maintenance of the park’s natural and cultural resources. An expanded research program would examine the role of fire and mechanical treatments in enhancing natural resources, reducing fuel loading, and specific impacts of fire on key natural resources; research would also be used to adaptively guide the fire management program and help to maximize the benefits to park resources. Project planning will favor projects that integrate natural and cultural resource goals and objectives into the design and implementation of fuel reduction projects. The three alternatives share many common elements that do not vary from one alternative to the next. For example, the fire management approach for Muir Woods National Monument, using prescribed fire and mechanical fuel reduction to reduce invasive species, reduce fuel loading and restore the role of fire in the redwood old growth coast redwood forest. Other actions common include participation in the WUI Initiative funding program for outside agencies and groups, continued maintenance of the park’s fire roads, trails, and defensible space around park buildings, suppression of unplanned ignitions, provision to the public of fire information and educational materials, monitoring of the effects of fire management actions, construction of a new fire cache structure and fuel reduction treatments for San Francisco parklands. PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76859 Alternative A, Continued Fuel Reduction for Public Safety and Limited Resource Enhancement, is the No Action alternative required by NEPA. Alternative A is based on the 1993 GGNRA FMP updated to include the current planning area and current national fire management policies. The focus of the 1993 FMP program is on vegetation management through the application of prescribed fire to perpetuate fire-dependent natural systems. In recent practice, many fire management actions have been mechanical fuel reduction projects (e.g., mowing, cutting to remove non-native shrubs and trees, and selective thinning in forested stands) funded through the Wildland Urban Interface Program. This alternative would rely on the continued implementation of the 1993 FMP supplemented by mechanical fuel reduction projects in the WUI zone and suppression of all wildfires. Current research projects would continue and would focus on the role of fire to enhance natural resources and the effects of fire on key natural resources to determine the effectiveness of various fuel treatments. Alternative B, Hazard Reduction and Restricted Fire Use for Research and Resource Enhancement, emphasizes the use of mechanical methods to reduce fuel loading in areas with the highest risks. Compared to Alternative A, Alternative B would increase the number of acres mechanically treated each year, with a focus on the reduction of high fuel loads in the WUI area. Limited use of prescribed fire could occur for research purposes within the park interior. Research projects would examine the role of fire to enhance natural resources and the effects of fire on key natural resources to determine the effectiveness of various fuel treatments. Natural and cultural resource goals and objectives would be integrated into the design and implementation of fuel reduction projects. Planning Background: A notice of availability for the Draft EIS was published in the Federal Register (March 21, 2005) and the document made available for public review and comment through May 27, 2005 (extended from the original May 17, 2005 date to provide additional time for review). The park also announced availability of the DEIS through a mass mailing and posting on the park’s Web site. E:\FR\FM\28DEN1.SGM 28DEN1 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 http:// 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

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 28, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76858-76860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-7898]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Final Environmental Impact Statement for Fire Management Plan; 
Golden Gate National Recreation Area, Muir Woods National Monument and 
Fort Point National Historic Site; Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo 
Counties, CA; Notice of Availability

    Summary: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, 
January 1, 1970, as amended), and the Council on Environmental Quality 
Regulations (40 CFR part 1500-1508), the National Park Service, 
Department of the Interior, has prepared a Final Environmental Impact 
Statement for an new Fire Management Plan for Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area (GGNRA), Muir Woods National Monument and Fort Point 
National Historic Site--the latter two parks being under the 
administration of GGNRA. The Fire Management Plan Final Environmental 
Impact Statement (FEIS) evaluates fire management options for 
approximately 15,000 acres of GGNRA's nearly 75,000 legislated acres in 
Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo counties. The Fire Management Plan 
FEIS describes and analyzes three alternative strategies to replace the 
1993 GGNRA Fire Management Plan with a plan that conforms to current 
Federal wildland fire management policy and National Park Service (NPS) 
management policies. Potential impacts and mitigating measures are 
described for the two action alternatives and a no action alternative. 
The alternative selected after this conservation planning and 
environmental impact analysis process will serve as a blueprint for 
fire management actions for the GGNRA over the next 10-15 years.
    The FEIS fire planning and analysis area does not include the 
following lands:
    1. The northern lands of GGNRA, comprising 18,000 acres north of 
the Bolinas-Fairfax Road in western Marin County, which are managed by 
Point Reyes National Seashore under an agreement between the two park 
units. Fire management responsibilities for these northern lands are 
addressed in the Point Reyes FMP (approved October 29, 2004).
    2. Lands within the jurisdictional boundary of GGNRA that are not 
directly managed by the National Park Service. This includes the San 
Francisco Watershed, managed by the San Francisco Public Utilities 
Commission (with overlays of NPS easements) and

[[Page 76859]]

the interior portion of the Presidio of San Francisco which is managed 
by the Presidio Trust, a Federal corporation. The coastal portion of 
the Presidio managed by the GGNRA, is included in the planning area.
    In addition to lands currently under the management of the NPS, the 
subject FMP planning area includes those lands within the legislative 
boundary that may pass to NPS management in the near future. These 
areas, all in San Mateo County, include Cattle Hill and Pedro Point.
    Purpose and Need for Federal Action: The 1993 FMP for GGNRA focused 
primarily on natural resource management issues and needs to be updated 
to more fully address cultural resource concerns, provide guidance for 
parklands acquired since 1993, and provide more guidance on effectively 
reducing fire risk along wildland urban interface (WUI) areas in the 
park. The new FMP is needed to reflect the emphasis of recent years on 
fuel reduction projects that effectively reduce wildfire risk to 
natural and cultural park resources and to private property along the 
WUI zone. In addition, the new FMP will address the role that fire 
management actions can have on ecosystem changes to parklands such as 
the spread of more flammable, invasive, nonnative plant species, dense 
second-growth forests with high fuel loads, conversion of plant 
community type in the absence of wildland fire, alteration of important 
cultural landscapes through overgrowth of vegetation, and the decline 
of certain fire-adapted plant species.
    The FMP will provide a framework for all fire management activities 
in a manner responsive to natural and cultural resource objectives 
while reducing risks to developed facilities and adjacent communities 
and providing for public and staff safety. The purposes of this 
conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process are:
     To prepare a new FMP that is consistent with Federal 
Wildland Fire Management Policy and conforms to agency guidelines for 
fire management plans and programs; and
     To help achieve resource management objectives consistent 
with the park's cultural resource, natural resource, and land 
management plans, and to be responsive to safety considerations for 
park visitors, employees, and resources.
    Proposed Fire Management Plan. Alternative C is the alternative 
preferred by the NPS and has also been determined by the NPS to be the 
``environmentally preferred'' alternative. The three FMP EIS 
alternatives differ in the number of acres proposed for treatment 
through prescribed burning or mechanical treatments in the park 
interior versus the outer parklands that border residential development 
in the WUI zone. Each alternative has an upper limit set on the number 
of acres that could be treated annually as shown in Table 1. 
Alternative C allows for the greatest number of acres to be treated on 
an annual basis to achieve fire management and resource objectives 
through the use of a broad range of fire management strategies. 
Mechanical treatment and prescribed burning would be used throughout 
the park as a means to reduce fuel loading and achieve resource 
enhancement goals. Mechanical treatments, complemented by prescribed 
fire, would be employed to assist with restoration and maintenance of 
the park's natural and cultural resources. An expanded research program 
would examine the role of fire and mechanical treatments in enhancing 
natural resources, reducing fuel loading, and specific impacts of fire 
on key natural resources; research would also be used to adaptively 
guide the fire management program and help to maximize the benefits to 
park resources. Project planning will favor projects that integrate 
natural and cultural resource goals and objectives into the design and 
implementation of fuel reduction projects.
    The three alternatives share many common elements that do not vary 
from one alternative to the next. For example, the fire management 
approach for Muir Woods National Monument, using prescribed fire and 
mechanical fuel reduction to reduce invasive species, reduce fuel 
loading and restore the role of fire in the redwood old growth coast 
redwood forest. Other actions common include participation in the WUI 
Initiative funding program for outside agencies and groups, continued 
maintenance of the park's fire roads, trails, and defensible space 
around park buildings, suppression of unplanned ignitions, provision to 
the public of fire information and educational materials, monitoring of 
the effects of fire management actions, construction of a new fire 
cache structure and fuel reduction treatments for San Francisco 
parklands.
    Alternative A, Continued Fuel Reduction for Public Safety and 
Limited Resource Enhancement, is the No Action alternative required by 
NEPA. Alternative A is based on the 1993 GGNRA FMP updated to include 
the current planning area and current national fire management 
policies. The focus of the 1993 FMP program is on vegetation management 
through the application of prescribed fire to perpetuate fire-dependent 
natural systems. In recent practice, many fire management actions have 
been mechanical fuel reduction projects (e.g., mowing, cutting to 
remove non-native shrubs and trees, and selective thinning in forested 
stands) funded through the Wildland Urban Interface Program. This 
alternative would rely on the continued implementation of the 1993 FMP 
supplemented by mechanical fuel reduction projects in the WUI zone and 
suppression of all wildfires. Current research projects would continue 
and would focus on the role of fire to enhance natural resources and 
the effects of fire on key natural resources to determine the 
effectiveness of various fuel treatments.
    Alternative B, Hazard Reduction and Restricted Fire Use for 
Research and Resource Enhancement, emphasizes the use of mechanical 
methods to reduce fuel loading in areas with the highest risks. 
Compared to Alternative A, Alternative B would increase the number of 
acres mechanically treated each year, with a focus on the reduction of 
high fuel loads in the WUI area. Limited use of prescribed fire could 
occur for research purposes within the park interior. Research projects 
would examine the role of fire to enhance natural resources and the 
effects of fire on key natural resources to determine the effectiveness 
of various fuel treatments. Natural and cultural resource goals and 
objectives would be integrated into the design and implementation of 
fuel reduction projects.
    Planning Background: A notice of availability for the Draft EIS was 
published in the Federal Register (March 21, 2005) and the document 
made available for public review and comment through May 27, 2005 
(extended from the original May 17, 2005 date to provide additional 
time for review). The park also announced availability of the DEIS 
through a mass mailing and posting on the park's Web site.

[[Page 76860]]



                  Table 1.--Summary of Alternatives by Annual Acres Treated and Treatment Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Alternative A
            Treatment type                       County                 \1\        Alternative B   Alternative C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mechanical Treatment \2\..............  Marin...................              75             180             225
                                        San Francisco...........               5              10              10
                                        San Mateo...............              20              40              40
                                       ---------------------------
                                        Total...................             100             230             275
                                       ===========================
Prescribed Fire.......................  Marin...................             100             120             285
                                        San Francisco...........              <1              <1              <1
                                        San Mateo...............              10               0              35
                                       ---------------------------
                                        Total...................             110             120            320
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 http://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