Notice of Availability of the Draft Resource Management Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Rio Puerco Field Office, New Mexico, 41444-41446 [2012-17146]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
41444
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
would also be enhanced by a reduction
in the number and spacing of oil and gas
drilling locations where wells penetrate
the potash formation.
The draft Secretary’s Order retains
several important features of the 1986
Order, including the boundaries of the
Designated Potash Area established in
the 1986 Order, as corrected in 1987.
The draft Secretary’s Order also retains
language of the 1986 Order for special
terms and conditions for oil and gas
leases and potash leases issued,
readjusted, or reinstated in the
Designated Potash Area. The draft
Secretary’s Order seeks to retain the
wording of the 1986 Order to the extent
practicable.
The provisions in this draft
Secretary’s Order are consistent with the
Department’s regulations, onshore
orders, and the oil and gas lease form.
The Department’s existing regulations
and onshore orders allow the BLM to
impose conditions of approval on
permits to drill and require protection of
other mineral resources, other natural
resources, environmental quality, life,
health, safety, and property. See 43 CFR
subparts 3162.1, 3164.1, and 3165.1.
The oil and gas lease form (BLM form
3100–11) provides that the rights
granted in the lease are subject to the
Secretary’s subsequent formal orders
when not inconsistent with the lease
rights. The lease form also provides that
lessees will take reasonable measures
that BLM deems necessary to minimize
adverse impacts to other resources and
to other land uses or users. The
provisions in the draft Secretary’s Order
are also consistent with the regulations
governing potash leasing, exploration,
and development. See 43 CFR part 3500
and subpart 3190.
Before including your phone number,
email address, or other personal
identifying information with the
submission of your comments, you
should be aware that your entire
submission—including your personal
identifying information—may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you may ask us to withhold your
personal identifying information from
public review, we cannot guarantee that
we will be able to do so.
Authority: 43 CFR 3164.1, 43 CFR 3590.2.
Jesse Juen,
New Mexico State Director.
[FR Doc. 2012–16909 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–VC–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:08 Jul 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLNMA01200 L16100000.DP000/
LXSS034G0000]
Notice of Availability of the Draft
Resource Management Plan and Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Rio Puerco Field Office, New
Mexico
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976, as
amended, the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has prepared a Draft
Resource Management Plan (RMP) and
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the Rio Puerco Field Office and
by this notice is announcing the
opening of the public comment period.
DATES: To ensure that comments will be
considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Draft RMP/
Draft EIS within 90 days following the
date the Environmental Protection
Agency publishes this notice of the
Draft RMP/Draft EIS in the Federal
Register. The BLM will announce future
meetings or hearings and any other
public participation activities at least 15
days in advance through public notices,
media releases, and/or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
related to the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/
Draft EIS by any of the following
methods:
• Web site: https://www.blm.gov/nm/
riopuerco.
• Email:
BLM_NM_RPFO_Comments@blm.gov.
• Fax: 505–761–8911, attn.: Angel
Martinez.
˜
• Mail: 435 Montano Road NE.,
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87107, attn.:
Angel Martinez.
Copies of the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/
Draft EIS are available at the Rio Puerco
Field Office, at the above address; the
New Mexico State Office at 301
Dinosaur Trail, Santa Fe, New Mexico;
and the Grants Field Station at 202
Smokey Circle, Grants, New Mexico.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information contact Angel
Martinez, Planning and Environmental
Coordinator; telephone 505–761–8918;
˜
address 435 Montano Road NE.,
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87107;
email a1martinez@blm.gov. Persons
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
1–800–877–8339 to contact the above
individual during normal business
hours. The service is available 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message
or question with the above individual.
You will receive a reply during normal
business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Rio
Puerco Draft RMP/Draft EIS, the BLM
analyzes the environmental
consequences of four alternative landuse plans under consideration for
managing approximately 744,387 acres
of surface estate and 3.4 million acres of
subsurface mineral estate. These lands,
administered by the BLM Rio Puerco
Field Office, are located within
Bernalillo, Cibola, McKinley, Sandoval,
Torrance, and Valencia counties in
central New Mexico.
This land-use plan would replace the
current Rio Puerco RMP, which was
approved in 1986. The RMP revision is
needed to provide updated management
decisions for a variety of uses and
resources, including land-tenure
adjustments, land-use authorizations,
mineral resources, recreation, areas with
special management designations, lands
with wilderness characteristics,
livestock grazing, transportation access,
renewable energy, visual resources,
wildland/urban interface, and others.
The approved Rio Puerco RMP will
apply only to the BLM-administered
public lands and Federal mineral estate.
The four alternatives analyzed in
detail in the Draft RMP/Draft EIS are as
follows:
• Alternative A, No Action, or a
continuation of existing management;
• Alternative B, which would
emphasize resource conservation and
protection;
• Alternative C, the BLM’s Preferred
Alternative, which would provide for a
balance of resources uses with
protections; and
• Alternative D, which would allow
for a greater opportunity for resource
use and development.
Among the special designations under
consideration within the range of
alternatives, Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC) are
proposed to protect certain resource
values. Pertinent information regarding
these ACECs, including proposed
designation acreages and resource-use
limitations, is summarized below. Each
alternative considers a combination of
resource-use limitations for each ACEC.
A more detailed summary of the
proposed ACECs by alternative is
available at the project Web site.
• Bluewater Canyon ACEC (currently
97 acres; Alternatives B–D would
E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM
13JYN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices
expand to 941 acres). This ACEC would
be managed for riparian habitat,
wildlife, scenic values, and primitive
recreation opportunities. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: No
Surface Occupancy (NSO) stipulations
on mineral leases; prohibition on the
sale of commercial or home-use forest
products (under Alternative D,
fuelwood collection would be allowed
outside of riparian areas); Closed to offroad vehicles except for authorized use;
restrictions on use of large mechanized
firefighting equipment, chemical drops,
intensive forestry management, and fire
hazard reduction; closed to extraction of
salable minerals; withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry; managed as
Visual Resource Management (VRM)
Class II; restrictions on camping within
the riparian zone; livestock grazing
prohibited, or would be limited to
prescribed grazing;
• Bony Canyon ACEC (not currently
designated; Alternatives B and C would
designate 1,150 acres; Alternative D
would designate as a Research Natural
Area). This ACEC would be managed for
paleontological values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include:
Limited travel to authorized use only, or
to existing primitive roads and trails;
NSO stipulation for leasable fluid
minerals; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry; livestock grazing
prohibited, or limited to prescribed
grazing.
• Cabezon Peak ACEC (currently
5,765 acres; Alternatives B and C would
expand to 17,150 acres; Alternative D
would expand to 6,984acres). This
ACEC would be managed for scenic,
cultural, geologic, and rare plant values.
Proposed resource-use limitations
include: Motorized travel limited to
authorized use; livestock grazing
prohibited or limited to prescriptive
grazing; NSO, controlled surface use
(CSU), and timing stipulations for
leasable fluid minerals; closure to
extraction of salable minerals;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
management as VRM Class II.
˜
• Canon Jarido ACEC (currently
designated as a Special Management
Area (SMA); Alternatives B–C would
designate 6,536 acres; Alternative D
would designate 1,794 acres). This
ACEC would be managed for scenic,
wildlife, and cultural values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include:
Motorized vehicle use limited to
existing primitive roads and trails with
no motorized travel in riparian areas;
NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable
fluid minerals; closed to extraction of
salable minerals; managed as VRM Class
II; livestock grazing prohibited, or
limited to prescribed grazing.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:08 Jul 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
˜
• Canon Tapia ACEC (Alternatives
A–C would maintain the ACEC at 990
acres; Alternative D would remove the
ACEC designation and manage the area
as part of a Special Recreation
Management Area (SRMA)). The ACEC
would be managed for cultural values.
Proposed resource-use limitations
would include: NSO or CSU stipulation
for leasable fluid minerals; limit
motorized travel to existing primitive
roads and trails; livestock grazing
prohibited or limited to prescribed
grazing; closed to extraction of salable
minerals; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry.
• Cerro Verde ACEC (There is
currently no special designation for the
area; Alternatives B–C would designate
5,292 acres; Alternative D would
include the area as part of a SRMA).
This ACEC would be managed for
geologic and scenic values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: NSO
or CSU stipulations for leasable fluid
minerals; salable mineral extraction
would be avoided or prohibited;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
managed as VRM Class II; motorized
travel limited to authorized use;
livestock grazing would be prohibited,
or would be limited to prescribed
grazing.
• Elk Springs ACEC (Currently 10,334
acres; Alternatives B–D would expand
to 10,324 acres). This ACEC would be
managed for crucial winter deer and elk
range, scenic, and unique geologic
values. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: No surface
disturbance between November and
May; motorized vehicle use limited to
existing primitive roads and trails, and
closed to motorized vehicle use from
December to May; all or portions of the
ACEC withdrawn from mineral entry;
NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable
minerals in all or portions of the ACEC;
managed as VRM Class II; livestock
grazing prohibited, or limited to
prescribed grazing.
• Espinosa Ridge ACEC (formerly Ball
Ranch) (Currently 1,478 acres;
Alternative B would expand to 10,295
acres; Alternative C would expand to
7,687 acres; and Alternative D would
maintain current acreage). This ACEC
would be managed for paleontological,
geologic, scenic, special status plants,
riparian, and cultural values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include:
Withdrawn from locatable mineral
entry; closed to mineral leasing, or
leased with NSO or CSU stipulations;
closed to extraction of salable minerals;
managed as VRM Class II; motorized
travel limited to existing primitive roads
and trails; controlled access maintained;
livestock grazing prohibited from all or
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
41445
a portion of the ACEC, or limited to
prescriptive grazing; closed to casual
collecting of paleontological resources.
• Guadalupe Ruin and Community
ACEC (Currently 478 acres designated
as a SMA; Alternatives B–D would
designate the area as an ACEC). This
ACEC would be managed for cultural
and scenic values. Proposed resourceuse limitations include: 40-acre fenced
area closed to motorized vehicle use,
with the rest of the area limited to
existing primitive roads and trails;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
closed to extraction of leasable fluid
minerals; closed to extraction of salable
minerals; livestock grazing prohibited or
limited to prescribed grazing; managed
as VRM Class II.
• Ignacio Chavez Grant ACEC
(Currently designated as a SMA (43,026
acres) and a Wilderness Study Area
(WSA) (33,182 acres)); Alternatives B–C
would designate an ACEC to correspond
with the SMA; Alternative D would not
designate an ACEC, but would manage
the area as part of a SRMA). This ACEC
would be managed for scenic and
wildlife values. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: Travel would be
limited to existing primitive roads and
trails, with motorized seasonal closures
of certain roads; NSO or CSU
stipulations for leasable fluid minerals;
closed to extraction of salable minerals;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
managed as VRM Class II; livestock
grazing prohibited, or limited to
prescribed livestock grazing.
• Jones Canyon ACEC (Currently 639
acres; Alternatives B would expand the
ACEC boundary to 959acres;
Alternatives C & D would maintain the
ACEC at 639 acres). This ACEC would
be managed for cultural and scenic
values. Potential resource-use
limitations include: NSO or CSU
stipulations for leasable fluid minerals;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
extraction of salable minerals avoided or
prohibited; managed as VRM Class II;
motorized travel limited to existing
primitive roads and trails; livestock
grazing prohibited, or limited to
prescribed livestock grazing.
• Legacy Uranium Mines ACEC (Not
currently designated, Alternatives B–D
would designate 50 acres). This ACEC
would be managed for health and safety
concerns. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: NSO for leasable
fluid minerals; closed to extraction of
salable minerals; avoidance area for
rights-of-way; motorized travel limited
to authorized use; livestock grazing
prohibited, or limited to prescribed
grazing.
• Ojito ACEC (Currently 16,310acres;
Alternative B would maintain current
E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM
13JYN1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
41446
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 135 / Friday, July 13, 2012 / Notices
boundaries; Alternative C would
exclude the 6,454 acres in the Ojito
Wilderness Area; Alternative D would
remove the designation). This ACEC
would be managed for geologic,
paleontological, cultural, scenic, rare
plants, and biological values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: Parts
to all of the ACEC are withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry; parts of the
ACEC are closed to fluid mineral
leasing; minerals extraction of salable
minerals closed or avoided in parts of
the ACEC; CSU stipulations on areas
open to leasable minerals; close parts of
the ACEC to all but authorized users;
limit motorized travel to authorized use,
or limit to existing primitive roads and
trails; managed as VRM Class II;
livestock grazing prohibited, or limited
to prescriptive grazing; implement
timing limitation stipulation around
raptor nests.
• Petaca Pinta ACEC (Currently
13,723 acres are designated as an SMA;
Alternatives B–D would correspond
with SMA boundaries). This ACEC
would be managed for wildlife and
scenic values. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: Motorized vehicle
use limited to existing primitive roads
and trails; closed to fluid mineral
leasing; closed to extraction of salable
minerals; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry; managed as VRM Class II;
livestock grazing prohibited, or limited
to prescribed grazing.
• Pronoun Cave Complex ACEC
(Currently 1,181 acres designated as a
SMA; Alternative B would expand the
ACEC to 1,342 acres; Alternative C
would maintain current boundaries;
Alternative D would remove the special
designation and manage as part of a
SRMA). This ACEC would be managed
for geologic and wildlife values.
Proposed resource-use restrictions
include: CSU stipulations for leasable
fluid minerals; extraction of salable
minerals avoided or prohibited;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
closed to all travel except for authorized
use, or limited to existing primitive
roads and trails; caves would be closed
to recreation, either year-round or
during bats’ winter hibernation period;
livestock grazing would be prohibited,
or limited to prescribed grazing.
• San Luis Mesa Raptor Area ACEC
(Currently 10,483 acres; Alternatives B–
C would expand to 10,483 acres;
Alternative D would remove the ACEC
designation and manage as part of a
SRMA). This ACEC would be managed
for wildlife values. Proposed resourceuse limitations include: Human
activities and surface disturbances
restricted around raptor nest sites from
February 1 to July 15; prohibit surface
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:08 Jul 12, 2012
Jkt 226001
disturbance in portions of the ACEC;
travel limited to existing primitive roads
and trails; portions of the ACEC
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
CSU stipulation around prairie dog
towns; timing limitations stipulations
for protection of raptor habitat; NSO or
CSU for leasable minerals; extraction of
salable minerals prohibited or avoided;
livestock grazing prohibited or limited
to prescribed grazing.
• San Miguel Dome ACEC (Not
currently designated; Alternatives B–C
would designate 4,437 acres; Alternative
D would not designate but would
manage the area as part of a SRMA).
This ACEC would be managed for
geologic values and biological soil
crusts. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: Livestock grazing
prohibited, or limited to prescribed
grazing; motorized travel limited to
existing primitive roads and trails;
pedestrian access limited to designated
hiking trails; NSO for leasable fluid
minerals; extraction of salable minerals
would be avoided or prohibited;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry.
• Torreon Fossil Fauna ACEC
(Currently 6,488 acres is designated as
a SMA and ACEC; Alternatives B–D
maintain the ACEC designation). This
ACEC would be managed for rare plants
and paleontological resources. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: CSU
for leasable fluid minerals; motorized
travel limited to existing primitive roads
and trails.
The land-use planning process was
initiated on February 29, 2008, through
a Notice of Intent published in the
Federal Register (73 FR 11142),
notifying the public of a formal scoping
period and soliciting public
participation. Eight scoping meetings
were held in April 2008 in
Albuquerque, Bernalillo, Cuba, Grants,
Gallup, Los Lunas, Moriarty, and Rio
Rancho. Between March 2007 and
February 2008, Rio Puerco Field Office
managers and staff had discussions
about the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/Draft
EIS with 12 local American Indian tribal
groups, including Acoma Pueblo,
Eastern Navajo Agency Council, Isleta
Pueblo, Jemez Pueblo, Laguna Pueblo,
Navajo Nation, Ojo Encino Navajo
Chapter, Sandia Pueblo, Santo Domingo
Pueblo, Torreon Navajo Chapter,
Torreon Red Dog group, Zia Pueblo, and
Zuni Pueblo. A scoping presentation
was given to the BLM Resource
Advisory Council (RAC) in March 2008.
The BLM also met with various other
stakeholder and interest groups. In
addition, two Economic Profile System
workshops were held early in the
process with local citizens and
community leaders to develop a
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
common understanding of the local
economies and the ways in which landuse planning decisions might affect
them. During the scoping period ending
on September 30, 2008, the public
provided the Rio Puerco Field Office
with input on relevant issues to
consider in the planning process.
Additional information was collected
during two internal Alternatives
Development Workshops and one
Cooperating Agency Workshop. Based
on these issues, conflicts, information,
and the BLM’s goals and objectives, the
Rio Puerco Field Office
Interdisciplinary RMP Team and
managers formulated four alternatives
for consideration and analysis in the
Draft RMP/Draft EIS. Following the
close of the public review and comment
period, any substantive public
comments will be used to revise the
Draft RMP/Draft EIS in preparation for
its release to the public as the Proposed
Resource Management Plan revision and
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(Proposed RMP/Final EIS). The BLM
will respond to each substantive
comment received during the public
review and comment period by making
appropriate revisions to the document,
or explaining why the comment did not
warrant a change. Notice of the
availability of the Proposed RMP/Final
EIS will be posted in the Federal
Register. Please note that public
comments and information submitted—
including names, street addresses, and
email addresses of persons who submit
comments—will be available for public
review and disclosure at the above
address during regular business hours (8
a.m. to 4:30 p.m.), Monday through
Friday (except holidays).
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6; 40 CFR
1506.10; 43 CFR 1610.2
Jesse Juen,
New Mexico State Director.
[FR Doc. 2012–17146 Filed 7–12–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–AG–P
E:\FR\FM\13JYN1.SGM
13JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 135 (Friday, July 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41444-41446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-17146]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLNMA01200 L16100000.DP000/LXSS034G0000]
Notice of Availability of the Draft Resource Management Plan and
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Rio Puerco Field Office,
New Mexico
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976, as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a
Draft Resource Management Plan (RMP) and Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the Rio Puerco Field Office and by this notice is
announcing the opening of the public comment period.
DATES: To ensure that comments will be considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS within 90 days following
the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes this notice of
the Draft RMP/Draft EIS in the Federal Register. The BLM will announce
future meetings or hearings and any other public participation
activities at least 15 days in advance through public notices, media
releases, and/or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments related to the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/
Draft EIS by any of the following methods:
Web site: https://www.blm.gov/nm/riopuerco.
Email: BLM_NM_RPFO_Comments@blm.gov.
Fax: 505-761-8911, attn.: Angel Martinez.
Mail: 435 Monta[ntilde]o Road NE., Albuquerque, New Mexico
87107, attn.: Angel Martinez.
Copies of the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/Draft EIS are available at the
Rio Puerco Field Office, at the above address; the New Mexico State
Office at 301 Dinosaur Trail, Santa Fe, New Mexico; and the Grants
Field Station at 202 Smokey Circle, Grants, New Mexico.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Angel
Martinez, Planning and Environmental Coordinator; telephone 505-761-
8918; address 435 Monta[ntilde]o Road NE., Albuquerque, New Mexico,
87107; email a1martinez@blm.gov. Persons who use a telecommunications
device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay
Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during
normal business hours. The service is available 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You
will receive a reply during normal business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Rio Puerco Draft RMP/Draft EIS, the
BLM analyzes the environmental consequences of four alternative land-
use plans under consideration for managing approximately 744,387 acres
of surface estate and 3.4 million acres of subsurface mineral estate.
These lands, administered by the BLM Rio Puerco Field Office, are
located within Bernalillo, Cibola, McKinley, Sandoval, Torrance, and
Valencia counties in central New Mexico.
This land-use plan would replace the current Rio Puerco RMP, which
was approved in 1986. The RMP revision is needed to provide updated
management decisions for a variety of uses and resources, including
land-tenure adjustments, land-use authorizations, mineral resources,
recreation, areas with special management designations, lands with
wilderness characteristics, livestock grazing, transportation access,
renewable energy, visual resources, wildland/urban interface, and
others. The approved Rio Puerco RMP will apply only to the BLM-
administered public lands and Federal mineral estate.
The four alternatives analyzed in detail in the Draft RMP/Draft EIS
are as follows:
Alternative A, No Action, or a continuation of existing
management;
Alternative B, which would emphasize resource conservation
and protection;
Alternative C, the BLM's Preferred Alternative, which
would provide for a balance of resources uses with protections; and
Alternative D, which would allow for a greater opportunity
for resource use and development.
Among the special designations under consideration within the range
of alternatives, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) are
proposed to protect certain resource values. Pertinent information
regarding these ACECs, including proposed designation acreages and
resource-use limitations, is summarized below. Each alternative
considers a combination of resource-use limitations for each ACEC. A
more detailed summary of the proposed ACECs by alternative is available
at the project Web site.
Bluewater Canyon ACEC (currently 97 acres; Alternatives B-
D would
[[Page 41445]]
expand to 941 acres). This ACEC would be managed for riparian habitat,
wildlife, scenic values, and primitive recreation opportunities.
Proposed resource-use limitations include: No Surface Occupancy (NSO)
stipulations on mineral leases; prohibition on the sale of commercial
or home-use forest products (under Alternative D, fuelwood collection
would be allowed outside of riparian areas); Closed to off-road
vehicles except for authorized use; restrictions on use of large
mechanized firefighting equipment, chemical drops, intensive forestry
management, and fire hazard reduction; closed to extraction of salable
minerals; withdrawn from locatable mineral entry; managed as Visual
Resource Management (VRM) Class II; restrictions on camping within the
riparian zone; livestock grazing prohibited, or would be limited to
prescribed grazing;
Bony Canyon ACEC (not currently designated; Alternatives B
and C would designate 1,150 acres; Alternative D would designate as a
Research Natural Area). This ACEC would be managed for paleontological
values. Proposed resource-use limitations include: Limited travel to
authorized use only, or to existing primitive roads and trails; NSO
stipulation for leasable fluid minerals; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry; livestock grazing prohibited, or limited to prescribed
grazing.
Cabezon Peak ACEC (currently 5,765 acres; Alternatives B
and C would expand to 17,150 acres; Alternative D would expand to
6,984acres). This ACEC would be managed for scenic, cultural, geologic,
and rare plant values. Proposed resource-use limitations include:
Motorized travel limited to authorized use; livestock grazing
prohibited or limited to prescriptive grazing; NSO, controlled surface
use (CSU), and timing stipulations for leasable fluid minerals; closure
to extraction of salable minerals; withdrawn from locatable mineral
entry; management as VRM Class II.
Ca[ntilde]on Jarido ACEC (currently designated as a
Special Management Area (SMA); Alternatives B-C would designate 6,536
acres; Alternative D would designate 1,794 acres). This ACEC would be
managed for scenic, wildlife, and cultural values. Proposed resource-
use limitations include: Motorized vehicle use limited to existing
primitive roads and trails with no motorized travel in riparian areas;
NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable fluid minerals; closed to
extraction of salable minerals; managed as VRM Class II; livestock
grazing prohibited, or limited to prescribed grazing.
Ca[ntilde]on Tapia ACEC (Alternatives A-C would maintain
the ACEC at 990 acres; Alternative D would remove the ACEC designation
and manage the area as part of a Special Recreation Management Area
(SRMA)). The ACEC would be managed for cultural values. Proposed
resource-use limitations would include: NSO or CSU stipulation for
leasable fluid minerals; limit motorized travel to existing primitive
roads and trails; livestock grazing prohibited or limited to prescribed
grazing; closed to extraction of salable minerals; withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry.
Cerro Verde ACEC (There is currently no special
designation for the area; Alternatives B-C would designate 5,292 acres;
Alternative D would include the area as part of a SRMA). This ACEC
would be managed for geologic and scenic values. Proposed resource-use
limitations include: NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable fluid
minerals; salable mineral extraction would be avoided or prohibited;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry; managed as VRM Class II;
motorized travel limited to authorized use; livestock grazing would be
prohibited, or would be limited to prescribed grazing.
Elk Springs ACEC (Currently 10,334 acres; Alternatives B-D
would expand to 10,324 acres). This ACEC would be managed for crucial
winter deer and elk range, scenic, and unique geologic values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: No surface disturbance between
November and May; motorized vehicle use limited to existing primitive
roads and trails, and closed to motorized vehicle use from December to
May; all or portions of the ACEC withdrawn from mineral entry; NSO or
CSU stipulations for leasable minerals in all or portions of the ACEC;
managed as VRM Class II; livestock grazing prohibited, or limited to
prescribed grazing.
Espinosa Ridge ACEC (formerly Ball Ranch) (Currently 1,478
acres; Alternative B would expand to 10,295 acres; Alternative C would
expand to 7,687 acres; and Alternative D would maintain current
acreage). This ACEC would be managed for paleontological, geologic,
scenic, special status plants, riparian, and cultural values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: Withdrawn from locatable mineral
entry; closed to mineral leasing, or leased with NSO or CSU
stipulations; closed to extraction of salable minerals; managed as VRM
Class II; motorized travel limited to existing primitive roads and
trails; controlled access maintained; livestock grazing prohibited from
all or a portion of the ACEC, or limited to prescriptive grazing;
closed to casual collecting of paleontological resources.
Guadalupe Ruin and Community ACEC (Currently 478 acres
designated as a SMA; Alternatives B-D would designate the area as an
ACEC). This ACEC would be managed for cultural and scenic values.
Proposed resource-use limitations include: 40-acre fenced area closed
to motorized vehicle use, with the rest of the area limited to existing
primitive roads and trails; withdrawn from locatable mineral entry;
closed to extraction of leasable fluid minerals; closed to extraction
of salable minerals; livestock grazing prohibited or limited to
prescribed grazing; managed as VRM Class II.
Ignacio Chavez Grant ACEC (Currently designated as a SMA
(43,026 acres) and a Wilderness Study Area (WSA) (33,182 acres));
Alternatives B-C would designate an ACEC to correspond with the SMA;
Alternative D would not designate an ACEC, but would manage the area as
part of a SRMA). This ACEC would be managed for scenic and wildlife
values. Proposed resource-use limitations include: Travel would be
limited to existing primitive roads and trails, with motorized seasonal
closures of certain roads; NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable fluid
minerals; closed to extraction of salable minerals; withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry; managed as VRM Class II; livestock grazing
prohibited, or limited to prescribed livestock grazing.
Jones Canyon ACEC (Currently 639 acres; Alternatives B
would expand the ACEC boundary to 959acres; Alternatives C & D would
maintain the ACEC at 639 acres). This ACEC would be managed for
cultural and scenic values. Potential resource-use limitations include:
NSO or CSU stipulations for leasable fluid minerals; withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry; extraction of salable minerals avoided or
prohibited; managed as VRM Class II; motorized travel limited to
existing primitive roads and trails; livestock grazing prohibited, or
limited to prescribed livestock grazing.
Legacy Uranium Mines ACEC (Not currently designated,
Alternatives B-D would designate 50 acres). This ACEC would be managed
for health and safety concerns. Proposed resource-use limitations
include: NSO for leasable fluid minerals; closed to extraction of
salable minerals; avoidance area for rights-of-way; motorized travel
limited to authorized use; livestock grazing prohibited, or limited to
prescribed grazing.
Ojito ACEC (Currently 16,310acres; Alternative B would
maintain current
[[Page 41446]]
boundaries; Alternative C would exclude the 6,454 acres in the Ojito
Wilderness Area; Alternative D would remove the designation). This ACEC
would be managed for geologic, paleontological, cultural, scenic, rare
plants, and biological values. Proposed resource-use limitations
include: Parts to all of the ACEC are withdrawn from locatable mineral
entry; parts of the ACEC are closed to fluid mineral leasing; minerals
extraction of salable minerals closed or avoided in parts of the ACEC;
CSU stipulations on areas open to leasable minerals; close parts of the
ACEC to all but authorized users; limit motorized travel to authorized
use, or limit to existing primitive roads and trails; managed as VRM
Class II; livestock grazing prohibited, or limited to prescriptive
grazing; implement timing limitation stipulation around raptor nests.
Petaca Pinta ACEC (Currently 13,723 acres are designated
as an SMA; Alternatives B-D would correspond with SMA boundaries). This
ACEC would be managed for wildlife and scenic values. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: Motorized vehicle use limited to
existing primitive roads and trails; closed to fluid mineral leasing;
closed to extraction of salable minerals; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry; managed as VRM Class II; livestock grazing prohibited,
or limited to prescribed grazing.
Pronoun Cave Complex ACEC (Currently 1,181 acres
designated as a SMA; Alternative B would expand the ACEC to 1,342
acres; Alternative C would maintain current boundaries; Alternative D
would remove the special designation and manage as part of a SRMA).
This ACEC would be managed for geologic and wildlife values. Proposed
resource-use restrictions include: CSU stipulations for leasable fluid
minerals; extraction of salable minerals avoided or prohibited;
withdrawn from locatable mineral entry; closed to all travel except for
authorized use, or limited to existing primitive roads and trails;
caves would be closed to recreation, either year-round or during bats'
winter hibernation period; livestock grazing would be prohibited, or
limited to prescribed grazing.
San Luis Mesa Raptor Area ACEC (Currently 10,483 acres;
Alternatives B-C would expand to 10,483 acres; Alternative D would
remove the ACEC designation and manage as part of a SRMA). This ACEC
would be managed for wildlife values. Proposed resource-use limitations
include: Human activities and surface disturbances restricted around
raptor nest sites from February 1 to July 15; prohibit surface
disturbance in portions of the ACEC; travel limited to existing
primitive roads and trails; portions of the ACEC withdrawn from
locatable mineral entry; CSU stipulation around prairie dog towns;
timing limitations stipulations for protection of raptor habitat; NSO
or CSU for leasable minerals; extraction of salable minerals prohibited
or avoided; livestock grazing prohibited or limited to prescribed
grazing.
San Miguel Dome ACEC (Not currently designated;
Alternatives B-C would designate 4,437 acres; Alternative D would not
designate but would manage the area as part of a SRMA). This ACEC would
be managed for geologic values and biological soil crusts. Proposed
resource-use limitations include: Livestock grazing prohibited, or
limited to prescribed grazing; motorized travel limited to existing
primitive roads and trails; pedestrian access limited to designated
hiking trails; NSO for leasable fluid minerals; extraction of salable
minerals would be avoided or prohibited; withdrawn from locatable
mineral entry.
Torreon Fossil Fauna ACEC (Currently 6,488 acres is
designated as a SMA and ACEC; Alternatives B-D maintain the ACEC
designation). This ACEC would be managed for rare plants and
paleontological resources. Proposed resource-use limitations include:
CSU for leasable fluid minerals; motorized travel limited to existing
primitive roads and trails.
The land-use planning process was initiated on February 29, 2008,
through a Notice of Intent published in the Federal Register (73 FR
11142), notifying the public of a formal scoping period and soliciting
public participation. Eight scoping meetings were held in April 2008 in
Albuquerque, Bernalillo, Cuba, Grants, Gallup, Los Lunas, Moriarty, and
Rio Rancho. Between March 2007 and February 2008, Rio Puerco Field
Office managers and staff had discussions about the Rio Puerco Draft
RMP/Draft EIS with 12 local American Indian tribal groups, including
Acoma Pueblo, Eastern Navajo Agency Council, Isleta Pueblo, Jemez
Pueblo, Laguna Pueblo, Navajo Nation, Ojo Encino Navajo Chapter, Sandia
Pueblo, Santo Domingo Pueblo, Torreon Navajo Chapter, Torreon Red Dog
group, Zia Pueblo, and Zuni Pueblo. A scoping presentation was given to
the BLM Resource Advisory Council (RAC) in March 2008. The BLM also met
with various other stakeholder and interest groups. In addition, two
Economic Profile System workshops were held early in the process with
local citizens and community leaders to develop a common understanding
of the local economies and the ways in which land-use planning
decisions might affect them. During the scoping period ending on
September 30, 2008, the public provided the Rio Puerco Field Office
with input on relevant issues to consider in the planning process.
Additional information was collected during two internal Alternatives
Development Workshops and one Cooperating Agency Workshop. Based on
these issues, conflicts, information, and the BLM's goals and
objectives, the Rio Puerco Field Office Interdisciplinary RMP Team and
managers formulated four alternatives for consideration and analysis in
the Draft RMP/Draft EIS. Following the close of the public review and
comment period, any substantive public comments will be used to revise
the Draft RMP/Draft EIS in preparation for its release to the public as
the Proposed Resource Management Plan revision and Final Environmental
Impact Statement (Proposed RMP/Final EIS). The BLM will respond to each
substantive comment received during the public review and comment
period by making appropriate revisions to the document, or explaining
why the comment did not warrant a change. Notice of the availability of
the Proposed RMP/Final EIS will be posted in the Federal Register.
Please note that public comments and information submitted--including
names, street addresses, and email addresses of persons who submit
comments--will be available for public review and disclosure at the
above address during regular business hours (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.),
Monday through Friday (except holidays).
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6; 40 CFR 1506.10; 43 CFR 1610.2
Jesse Juen,
New Mexico State Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-17146 Filed 7-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-AG-P
