Notice of Availability of Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Draft Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement, 26557-26558 [E6-6774]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 2006 / Notices
• Email: ksp_comments@blm.gov.
• Mail: Bureau of Land Management,
Central Yukon Field Office, ATTN:
Kobuk-Seward Peninsula RMP, 1150
University Avenue, Fairbanks, AK
99709
comments will become a matter of
public record.
Dated: April 28, 2006.
Ted R. Hudson,
Bureau of Land Management, Information
Collection Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 06–4258 Filed 5–4–06; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 4310–84–M
Jeanie Cole, (907) 474–2340,
jeanie_cole@ak.blm.gov or in writing to
the address listed above.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
The
Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Draft Resource
Management Plan/Environmental
Impact Statement (RMP/EIS) covers
approximately 13.1 million acres of
BLM-managed land in northwestern
Alaska. The Northwest Management
Framework Plan (MFP), a land use plan
that guides current management of the
area, was completed in 1982. BLM
published a Notice of Intent to prepare
an RMP/EIS in the Federal Register on
January 30, 2004. A 90-day formal
scoping period began with the
publication of that notice. Public
meetings were held in nine
communities, and the following primary
management concerns were identified:
(1) How should recreation be managed
to provide and maintain a diversity of
experiences on BLM-managed lands
while protecting subsistence resources
and opportunity, and what level of
commercial recreational use is
appropriate; (2) how should access trails
and roads for the use of OHVs for
various purposes, including recreation,
commercial use, subsistence, and casual
use, be managed while protecting
natural and cultural resources; (3) what
areas, if any, should be made available
for mineral exploration and
development; and (4) what areas, if any,
should be recommended for special
designations.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Bureau of Land Management
[AK–025–05–1610–DP–089L]
Notice of Availability of Kobuk-Seward
Peninsula Draft Resource Management
Plan and Environmental Impact
Statement
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and
the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, 43
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has prepared a Draft
Resource Management Plan/
Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/
EIS) for the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula
Planning Area.
DATES: Written comments on the Draft
RMP/EIS will be accepted until 90
calendar days after the date the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes its NOA in the Federal
Register. The BLM will announce future
meetings or hearings and any other
public involvement activities at least 15
days in advance through public notices,
media news releases, and/or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by the following methods:
26557
This draft RMP/EIS presents four
alternatives to address the issues
identified in scoping: a No Action
Alternative (Alternative A), an
Alternative that emphasizes resource
development (Alternative B), one that
emphasizes conservation (Alternative
C), and the agency Preferred Alternative
(Alternative D), which has elements of
B and C. The No Action Alternative
would continue existing management.
Alternative B would emphasize resource
development. Under this alternative, the
entire planning area would be open to
a variety of land and resource uses.
Alternative C would emphasize
conservation of natural resources. Under
this alternative, some resource uses or
activities be excluded over large areas.
The Preferred Alternative calls for a
balance between development and the
conservation of sensitive resources;
some resource uses or activities would
be excluded in limited areas. The lifting
of existing withdrawals may be
accomplished through actions approved
by the Secretary. As required by section
204(c)(2) of FLPMA, however,
withdrawals of areas greater than 5,000
acres in size require the approval of
Congress.
As required by 43 CFR 1610.7–2,
areas with potential for designation as
Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
(ACECs) and protective management
have been considered during the
planning process. Several potential
areas are considered for designation in
two alternatives. Boundaries, size, and
management direction within potential
ACECs vary by alternative. The
following tables illustrate the names and
acreages of each area and provide
summary descriptions of resource use
limitations for Alternatives C and D.
TABLE 1.—PROPOSED ACECS UNDER ALTERNATIVE C
Acreage
Resource use limitations
Nulato Hills ......................................
2 million .........................................
Western Arctic Caribou Herd
calving and insect relief ACEC.
Kigluaik ACEC .................................
2.9 million ......................................
Closed to locatable and leasable mineral entry; Limited OHV designation, ROW avoidance area, Retain in Federal ownership,
Closed to grazing, FLPMA and Recreation and Public Purposes
(R&PP) Act leases not allowed.
Same as Nulato Hills.
McCarthy’s Marsh ...........................
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
Name of area
131,000 ..........................................
Kuzitrin River ...................................
141,000 ..........................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:48 May 04, 2006
298,000 ..........................................
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Same as Nulato Hills, plus:
Communication site rights-of-way (ROW) limited to existing sites;
Level of commercial recreational use may be limited; Closed to
mineral material disposal.
Same as Nulato Hills, plus:
Closed to mineral material disposal; Level of commercial recreational
use may be limited.
Same as Nulato Hills.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
26558
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 87 / Friday, May 5, 2006 / Notices
TABLE 2.—ACECS AND RNAS PROPOSED UNDER ALTERNATIVE D (PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE)
Name of area
Acreage
Resource use limitations
Nulato Hills ACEC ...........................
1.1 million ......................................
Western Arctic Caribou Herd
calving and insect relief ACEC.
Inglutalik Watershed ACEC ............
2.9 million ......................................
Ungalik Watershed ACEC ...............
264,000 ..........................................
Shaktoolik Watershed ACEC ..........
Mount Osborn RNA .........................
234,000 ..........................................
84,000 ............................................
Limited OHV designation; Retained in Federal ownership; Closed to
grazing outside of existing allotments; ROW avoidance area;
FLPMA and R&PP leases not allowed; Open to fluid mineral leasing subject to minor constraints.
Same as Nulato Hills except it would not be designated as a ROW
avoidance area.
Same as Nulato Hills except there would be a 300-foot no surface
occupancy setback for leasable minerals on the mainstem river
and it would not be a ROW avoidance area.
Same as the Inglutalik Watershed ACEC with the addition of: A 300foot setback on the Ungalik River would be withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry.
Same as the Inglutalik Watershed ACEC.
Same as Nulato Hills except: It would be withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry; Communication site ROWs would be limited to existing sites; the level of commercial recreational use may be limited;
and it would be open to grazing.
466,000 ..........................................
Final acreage for areas designated as
ACECs would also depend on the result
of land conveyance to the State of
Alaska and Native Corporations.
Individual respondents may request
confidentiality. If you wish to withhold
your name or street address from public
review or from disclosure under the
Freedom of Information Act, you must
state this prominently at the beginning
of your written comment. Such requests
will be honored to the extent allowed by
law. All submissions from organizations
and businesses, and from individuals
identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, will be
available for public inspection in their
entirety. Copies of the Kobuk-Seward
Peninsula Draft RMP/EIS (paper or
compact disc) are available in the
Fairbanks District Office at the above
address; the Kotzebue Field Station,
P.O. Box 1049, Kotzebue, AK 99752; the
Nome Field Station, P.O. Box 925,
Nome, AK 99762; the Anchorage Field
Office, 6881 Abbott Loop Road,
Anchorage, AK 99507; and the Alaska
State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue,
Anchorage, AK 99513. The document
will also be available online and may be
viewed at: https://www.ak.blm.gov/ksp.
Henri R. Bisson,
State Director.
[FR Doc. E6–6774 Filed 5–4–06; 8:45 am]
cchase on PROD1PC60 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4310–JA–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:48 May 04, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Natural Gas Field proceeds for the life
of the field.
Bureau of Land Management
Dated: April 28, 2006.
Dennis Stenger,
Field Office Manager.
[FR Doc. E6–6792 Filed 5–4–06; 8:45 am]
[WY–100–06–1310–DB]
Notice of Meeting of the Pinedale
Anticline Working Group
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Emergency cancelation of public
meeting.
BILLING CODE 4310–22–P
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act (1976) and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (1972), the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) Pinedale
Anticline Working Group (PAWG) was
planned to meet in Pinedale, Wyoming,
for a business meeting. Due to lack of
PAWG member availability, this
meeting has been cancelled.
DATES: The PAWG will not meet May
16, 2005. A PAWG tour has been
scheduled for June 20. This tour is open
to the public, but there is limited
seating. Please RSVP with Matt
Anderson (contact information below).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt
Anderson, BLM/PAWG Liaison, Bureau
of Land Management, Pinedale Field
Office, 432 E. Mills St., P.O. Box 738,
Pinedale, WY 82941; 307–367–5328.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Pinedale Anticline Working Group
(PAWG) was authorized and established
with release of the Record of Decision
(ROD) for the Pinedale Anticline Oil
and Gas Exploration and Development
Project on July 27, 2000. The PAWG
advises the BLM on the development
and implementation of monitoring plans
and adaptive management decisions as
development of the Pinedale Anticline
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[NM–920–1310–06; NMNM 105214]
Notice of Proposed Reinstatement of
Terminated Oil and Gas Lease NMNM
105214
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of reinstatement of
terminated oil and gas lease.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Under the provisions of 30
U.S.C. 188(d) and (e), and 43 CFR
3108.2–3(a) and (b)(1), the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) received a
petition for reinstatement of oil and gas
lease NMNM 105214 from the lessee,
CHI Energy, Inc., for lands in Eddy
County, New Mexico. The petition was
filed on time and was accompanied by
all the rentals due since the date the
lease terminated under the law.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bernadine T. Martinez, BLM, New
Mexico State Office, at (505) 438–7530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: No lease
has been issued that affect the lands.
The lessee agrees to new lease terms for
rentals and royalties of $10.00 per acre
or fraction thereof, per year, and 162⁄3
percent, respectively. The lessee paid
the required $500.00 administrative fee
for the reinstatement of the lease and
$166.00 cost for publishing this Notice
in the Federal Register. The lessee met
E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM
05MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 87 (Friday, May 5, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26557-26558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6774]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[AK-025-05-1610-DP-089L]
Notice of Availability of Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Draft Resource
Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, 43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) has prepared a Draft Resource Management Plan/
Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/EIS) for the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula
Planning Area.
DATES: Written comments on the Draft RMP/EIS will be accepted until 90
calendar days after the date the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
publishes its NOA in the Federal Register. The BLM will announce future
meetings or hearings and any other public involvement activities at
least 15 days in advance through public notices, media news releases,
and/or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by the following methods:
Email: ksp_comments@blm.gov.
Mail: Bureau of Land Management, Central Yukon Field
Office, ATTN: Kobuk-Seward Peninsula RMP, 1150 University Avenue,
Fairbanks, AK 99709
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanie Cole, (907) 474-2340, jeanie_
cole@ak.blm.gov or in writing to the address listed above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Draft Resource
Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement (RMP/EIS) covers
approximately 13.1 million acres of BLM-managed land in northwestern
Alaska. The Northwest Management Framework Plan (MFP), a land use plan
that guides current management of the area, was completed in 1982. BLM
published a Notice of Intent to prepare an RMP/EIS in the Federal
Register on January 30, 2004. A 90-day formal scoping period began with
the publication of that notice. Public meetings were held in nine
communities, and the following primary management concerns were
identified: (1) How should recreation be managed to provide and
maintain a diversity of experiences on BLM-managed lands while
protecting subsistence resources and opportunity, and what level of
commercial recreational use is appropriate; (2) how should access
trails and roads for the use of OHVs for various purposes, including
recreation, commercial use, subsistence, and casual use, be managed
while protecting natural and cultural resources; (3) what areas, if
any, should be made available for mineral exploration and development;
and (4) what areas, if any, should be recommended for special
designations.
This draft RMP/EIS presents four alternatives to address the issues
identified in scoping: a No Action Alternative (Alternative A), an
Alternative that emphasizes resource development (Alternative B), one
that emphasizes conservation (Alternative C), and the agency Preferred
Alternative (Alternative D), which has elements of B and C. The No
Action Alternative would continue existing management. Alternative B
would emphasize resource development. Under this alternative, the
entire planning area would be open to a variety of land and resource
uses. Alternative C would emphasize conservation of natural resources.
Under this alternative, some resource uses or activities be excluded
over large areas. The Preferred Alternative calls for a balance between
development and the conservation of sensitive resources; some resource
uses or activities would be excluded in limited areas. The lifting of
existing withdrawals may be accomplished through actions approved by
the Secretary. As required by section 204(c)(2) of FLPMA, however,
withdrawals of areas greater than 5,000 acres in size require the
approval of Congress.
As required by 43 CFR 1610.7-2, areas with potential for
designation as Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs) and
protective management have been considered during the planning process.
Several potential areas are considered for designation in two
alternatives. Boundaries, size, and management direction within
potential ACECs vary by alternative. The following tables illustrate
the names and acreages of each area and provide summary descriptions of
resource use limitations for Alternatives C and D.
Table 1.--Proposed ACECs Under Alternative C
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resource use
Name of area Acreage limitations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nulato Hills.................. 2 million........ Closed to locatable
and leasable mineral
entry; Limited OHV
designation, ROW
avoidance area,
Retain in Federal
ownership, Closed to
grazing, FLPMA and
Recreation and
Public Purposes
(R&PP) Act leases
not allowed.
Western Arctic Caribou Herd 2.9 million...... Same as Nulato Hills.
calving and insect relief
ACEC.
Kigluaik ACEC................. 298,000.......... Same as Nulato Hills,
plus:
Communication site
rights-of-way (ROW)
limited to existing
sites; Level of
commercial
recreational use may
be limited; Closed
to mineral material
disposal.
McCarthy's Marsh.............. 131,000.......... Same as Nulato Hills,
plus:
Closed to mineral
material disposal;
Level of commercial
recreational use may
be limited.
Kuzitrin River................ 141,000.......... Same as Nulato Hills.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 26558]]
Table 2.--ACECs and RNAs Proposed Under Alternative D (Preferred
Alternative)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resource use
Name of area Acreage limitations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nulato Hills ACEC............. 1.1 million...... Limited OHV
designation;
Retained in Federal
ownership; Closed to
grazing outside of
existing allotments;
ROW avoidance area;
FLPMA and R&PP
leases not allowed;
Open to fluid
mineral leasing
subject to minor
constraints.
Western Arctic Caribou Herd 2.9 million...... Same as Nulato Hills
calving and insect relief except it would not
ACEC. be designated as a
ROW avoidance area.
Inglutalik Watershed ACEC..... 466,000.......... Same as Nulato Hills
except there would
be a 300-foot no
surface occupancy
setback for leasable
minerals on the
mainstem river and
it would not be a
ROW avoidance area.
Ungalik Watershed ACEC........ 264,000.......... Same as the
Inglutalik Watershed
ACEC with the
addition of: A 300-
foot setback on the
Ungalik River would
be withdrawn from
locatable mineral
entry.
Shaktoolik Watershed ACEC..... 234,000.......... Same as the
Inglutalik Watershed
ACEC.
Mount Osborn RNA.............. 84,000........... Same as Nulato Hills
except: It would be
withdrawn from
locatable mineral
entry; Communication
site ROWs would be
limited to existing
sites; the level of
commercial
recreational use may
be limited; and it
would be open to
grazing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final acreage for areas designated as ACECs would also depend on
the result of land conveyance to the State of Alaska and Native
Corporations.
Individual respondents may request confidentiality. If you wish to
withhold your name or street address from public review or from
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, you must state this
prominently at the beginning of your written comment. Such requests
will be honored to the extent allowed by law. All submissions from
organizations and businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, will be available for public inspection in their entirety.
Copies of the Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Draft RMP/EIS (paper or compact
disc) are available in the Fairbanks District Office at the above
address; the Kotzebue Field Station, P.O. Box 1049, Kotzebue, AK 99752;
the Nome Field Station, P.O. Box 925, Nome, AK 99762; the Anchorage
Field Office, 6881 Abbott Loop Road, Anchorage, AK 99507; and the
Alaska State Office, 222 West Seventh Avenue, Anchorage, AK 99513. The
document will also be available online and may be viewed at: https://
www.ak.blm.gov/ksp.
Henri R. Bisson,
State Director.
[FR Doc. E6-6774 Filed 5-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
