Amended Notice of Intent To Clarify the Scope of Analysis of the Environmental Document and Proposed Plan Amendment in the West Mojave Planning Area, to the Motorized Vehicle Access Element of the California Desert Conservation Area Plan, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, CA, 25758-25760 [2013-10374]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
25758
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2013 / Notices
1980, Norfolk, VA 23501–1980, was
rescored, which placed it in the funding
range. The grant award to EVMS was for
the same amount it would have received
had it been funded in FY 2010, but it
used funds under the Department of
Defense and Full-Year Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2011.
Dated: April 26, 2013.
Matthew E. Ammon,
Deputy Director, Office of Healthy Homes and
Lead Hazard Control.
[FR Doc. 2013–10412 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R9–MB–2012–N094; FF09M29000–
112–FXMB123209EAGL0L2]
RIN 1018–AX53
Migratory Birds; Eagle Conservation
Plan Guidance: Module 1—Land-Based
Wind Energy, Version 2
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce
that Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance:
Module 1—Land-based Wind Energy,
Version 2 is available. The guidance
provides recommendations for agency
staff and developers to use an iterative
process to avoid and minimize negative
effects on eagles and their habitats
resulting from the construction,
operation, and maintenance of landbased, wind energy facilities in the
United States.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.
George Allen, Division of Migratory Bird
Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive,
Arlington, Virginia 22203–1610, or 703–
358–1825.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Service is charged with implementing
many statutes that provide protection to
bald and golden eagles, including the
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
(BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668–668c), the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16
U.S.C. 703–12), and the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531–44).
Under these statutes, the Service
implements permit programs for eagles
as authorized by implementing
regulations in title 50 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR). In 2009, the
Service promulgated regulations in 50
CFR part 22 authorizing issuance of
permits for nonpurposeful take of eagles
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
(74 FR 46836, September 11, 2009). On
February 18, 2011, we issued a draft of
The Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance:
Module 1—Land-based Wind Energy for
public comment (76 FR 9529). We
received 124 comments by the end of
the comment period on May 19, 2011.
We have considered the public
comments received on the draft
guidance and now issue the Eagle
Conservation Plan Guidance: Module
1—Land-based Wind Energy, Version 2
(ECPG) to assist potential permit
applicants and to promote compliance
with BGEPA with respect to such
permits. The ECPG describes a process
for wind energy developers, in
coordination with the Service, to collect
and analyze information that could
support an application for a
programmatic permit to authorize
unintentional take of eagles at wind
energy facilities. The ECPG provides
recommendations for the development
of eagle conservation plans (ECPs) to
support issuance of eagle programmatic
take permits for wind facilities.
Programmatic take permits will
authorize limited nonpurposeful
mortality and disturbance of eagles at
wind facilities, provided that effective
offsetting conservation measures that
meet regulatory requirements are carried
out. To comply with the permit
regulations, conservation measures must
avoid and minimize take of eagles to the
maximum degree practicable, and, for
programmatic permits necessary to
authorize ongoing take of eagles,
advanced conservation practices must
be implemented, if available, such that
any remaining take is unavoidable.
Further, for eagle management
populations that the Service has
determined cannot sustain additional
mortality, any remaining take must be
offset through compensatory mitigation
such that the net effect on the eagle
management population is, at a
minimum, no net loss. The ECPG
interprets and clarifies the permit
requirements in the regulations at 50
CFR 22.26 and 22.27 and does not
impose any binding requirements
beyond those specified in the
regulations.
The Service recommends that ECPs be
developed in five successive stages. The
process is intended to be a progressive,
increasingly intensive look at potential
effects of the development and
operation of a particular site and design
configuration to eagles. The objectives,
recommended actions, and
recommended data sources for each of
the five stages in the ECP are described
in the Stage Overview table in the
guidance. The ECPG recommends that
project developers or operators employ
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
specific procedures in their site
assessments so the data can be
combined with that from other facilities
in a formal adaptive management
process. This adaptive management
process is designed to reduce
uncertainty about the effects of wind
facilities on eagles.
Project developers or operators are not
required to use the recommended
procedures in this ECPG. However, if
different approaches are used, the
developer or operator should coordinate
with the Service in advance to ensure
that approaches being considered will
provide comparable data and meet the
regulatory requirements. Additionally,
Service review time for applications that
employ different approaches will likely
be longer than if the recommendations
in the ECPG were followed.
The ECPG recommends that, at the
end of each of the first four stages,
project developers or operators
determine, in consultation with the
Service, which of the following
categories the project, as planned, falls
into: (1) High risk to eagles, with little
opportunity to minimize effects; (2) high
or moderate risk to eagles, but with an
opportunity to minimize effects; or (3)
minimal risk to eagles.
The ECPG is posted online at https://
www.fws.gov/migratorybirds. You can
request a printed copy of the guidance
by writing to the address or calling the
phone number listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
Dated: April 24, 2013.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–10387 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLCAD00000.L16100000.DS0000.
LXSSB0010000]
Amended Notice of Intent To Clarify
the Scope of Analysis of the
Environmental Document and
Proposed Plan Amendment in the West
Mojave Planning Area, to the Motorized
Vehicle Access Element of the
California Desert Conservation Area
Plan, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles and San
Bernardino Counties, CA
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department of Interior,
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
announces its intent to clarify the scope
of the Notice of Intent to Prepare an
E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM
02MYN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2013 / Notices
Environmental Document and Proposed
Plan Amendment for the West Mojave
(WEMO) Plan, Motorized Vehicle Access
Element, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles and
San Bernardino Counties, CA, which
was published in the Federal Register
on September 13, 2011 (76 FR 56466).
By this notice, the BLM is announcing
the beginning of a further, more focused
scoping process to solicit public
comments and identify issues related to
the clarified scope of the West Mojave
(WEMO) Route Network Project
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/
Plan Amendment as described under
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION below.
DATES: This notice initiates public
scoping on the clarified scope of the
WEMO Route Network Project EIS/plan
amendment and concurrent travel
management designation planning.
Comments must be submitted in writing
within 30 days from the publication
date of this notice in the Federal
Register. The BLM will provide
additional opportunities for public
participation as appropriate.
ADDRESSES: The public may submit
comments on the modified scope of the
analysis and related issues, by any of
the following methods:
• Email: cawemopa@blm.gov.
• Web site: https://www.blm.gov/ca/st/
en/fo/cdd/west_mojave_wemo.
• Fax: 951–697–5299.
• Mail: BLM California Desert District
Office, 22835 Calle San Juan de Los
Lagos, ATTN: West Mojave Route
Network Project, Moreno Valley, CA
92553–9046
Documents relevant to this proposal
may be examined at the California
Desert District Office or Web site
(address above), or the BLM’s California
State Office, 2800 Cottage Way,
Sacramento, CA 95825.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edythe Seehafer, telephone 760–252–
6021; address Bureau of Land
Management, Barstow Field Office, 2601
Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311;
email cawemopa@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 FIRS 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 January
2011, the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California partially
remanded the 2006 WEMO Plan
Amendment Record of Decision (ROD)
to the BLM and directed the BLM to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
amend the California Desert
Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan and
reconsider route designation throughout
the WEMO area, as well as other
specified issues in the WEMO Plan
(Center for Biological Diversity v. US
Bureau of Land Management Order Re:
Remedy (N.D. Cal. Jan 28, 2011)). By
court order, the BLM must issue a
revised decision by March 31, 2014. The
September 13, 2011 Notice of Intent
(NOI) invited comments on the
proposed scope and content of the
environmental document to address the
court’s issues related to the 2006 WEMO
ROD.
The public scoping process for this
action has been utilized to determine
relevant issues, impacts, and possible
alternatives that could influence the
scope of the environmental analysis,
and guide the entire process from plan
decision-making to route designation
review in order to comply with the
court order. The BLM conducted two
scoping meetings in Ridgecrest and
Barstow, on September 27 and 29, 2011
respectively. The BLM asked for
comments on the issues to be addressed,
motor vehicle access amendment
alternatives to be considered, decision
criteria for route designation, the best
approach to integrate recent BLM
transportation management guidance
into the document, and how to address
both plan-level and implementationlevel decisions. As a result of initial
scoping, the BLM subsequently held
eight working group meetings in
February and March of 2012 to collect
additional travel management input on
issues related to planning and
implementation for route designation in
specific geographic subregions within
the WEMO area.
The original NOI stated that the plan
amendment would:
1. Update and amend the Motorized
Vehicle Access Element of the CDCA
Plan. The NOI requested input on those
portions of the Element to be amended,
including to reflect current management
policy regarding access management.
The plan amendment proposes to
eliminate the ‘‘existing routes’’ language
in the CDCA Plan. This language
currently constrains the development of
a travel network in the WEMO area.
2. Identify and analyze alternatives for
amending the Motorized Vehicle Access
Element of the CDCA Plan. The NOI
indicated that subsequently,
concurrently, or in a combination of
both, additional environmental analysis
would address current route designation
within the WEMO sub-regional areas.
This analysis would result in new
decisions for each sub-regional area
within the WEMO plan area that would
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
25759
either retain or modify, in whole or in
part, current route designations.
3. Identify processes, decision criteria,
and related issues for designating travel
routes within sub-regional areas of the
WEMO plan area. The NOI identified
preliminary decision criteria and
requested input on issues and concerns,
and best science and technology to
establish viable networks within each
subarea.
Clarifications to the original NOI as a
result of scoping include the following:
1. The appropriate analytical
document for the plan amendment has
been determined to be an EIS.
2. This plan amendment also
proposes to modify Stopping/Parking/
Camping guidelines and other potential
area-wide impact minimization
strategies in addition to ‘‘existing
routes’’ language.
3. The BLM has determined that it
would be in the best interest of public
land management to evaluate
concurrently the plan amendments and
the activity planning that would adopt
route designations and implementation
strategies.
4. In response to the court order BLM
will establish a consistent baseline for
route designation.
5. Consistent with current guidance,
the plan amendment proposes to adopt
Travel Management Areas and broad
goals for these areas to provide the basis
for concurrent travel management
activity plans.
6. The activity plans will designate
specific travel routes and trails within
the travel management areas as part of
the site-specific implementation
planning, and will include
consideration of both public (casual use)
and other access needs and
opportunities on public lands.
7. This document will amend the
CDCA Plan Motor Vehicle Access
Element as it pertains to the West
Mojave Planning area. Amendment and
activity plan changes will update and
augment the 2006 West Mojave Plan,
through the replacement of Section
2.2.6, updates of Planning and
Regulatory Framework Section 3.1,
Affected Environment Sections 3.5,
affected impact analyses, strategies
provided in the activity plans, and
elsewhere as appropriate.
8. The BLM generally identified
issues of concern in the original Notice.
The following post-2006 ROD issues
also will be considered: New critical
habitat, designation of the Old Spanish
National Historic Trail, new wilderness
areas, consideration of lands with
wilderness characteristics, changes to
access from major rights-of-way and
other large plan amendment proposals
E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM
02MYN1
25760
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2013 / Notices
and decisions, and the proposed transfer
of management to the military of the
Johnson Valley OHV Open Area. Several
issues were specifically identified by
the court which will be addressed in the
document, including soils, unusual
plant assemblages, riparian and water
resources, cultural resources, grazing,
air quality in open areas, cumulative
effects, and mitigation. The BLM will
evaluate identified issues to be
addressed in the plan amendment, and
will place them into one of three
categories:
1. Issues to be resolved in the plan
amendment and associated activity
plans;
2. Issues to be resolved through policy
or administrative action; or
3. Issues beyond the scope of this plan
amendment.
The BLM will provide an explanation
in the Scoping Report or the draft EIS
as to why an issue was placed in
category two or three. An updated
inventory of lands with wilderness
characteristics for public lands in the
plan area will be completed for analysis
in the EIS. The public is also
encouraged to help identify any
management questions and concerns
that should be addressed in the clarified
scope of the plan. The BLM will work
collaboratively with interested parties to
identify the management decisions that
are best suited to local, regional, and
national needs and concerns.
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 1501.7, 40 CFR 1506.6,
40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2.
Thomas Pogacnik,
Deputy State Director.
[FR Doc. 2013–10374 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–40–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
National Park Service
[NPS–WASO–PVE–UPARR–12049;
PPWOSLAD00, PUA00UA08.GA0000]
Proposed Information Collection;
Urban Park and Recreation Recovery
Program Grants
AGENCY:
National Park Service, Interior.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:50 May 01, 2013
Jkt 229001
ACTION:
Notice; request for comments.
SUMMARY: We (National Park Service,
NPS) will ask the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) to approve the
information collection (IC) described
below. As required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 and as part of our
continuing efforts to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, we invite the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on this IC. This IC is
scheduled to expire on October 31,
2013. We may not conduct or sponsor
and a person is not required to respond
to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
DATES: To ensure that we are able to
consider your comments on this IC, we
must receive them by July 1, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on the
IC to Madonna L. Baucum, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, National
Park Service, 1201 I Street NW., MS
1237, Washington, DC 20005 (mail); or
madonna_baucum@nps.gov (email).
Please include ‘‘1024–0048—Urban Park
and Recreation Recovery Program’’ in
the subject line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about
this IC, contact Elisabeth Fondriest,
Recreation Grants Chief, State and Local
Assistance Programs Division at 202–
354–6916; or 1849 C Street NW., (2225),
Washington, DC 20240 (mail); or
elisabeth_fondriest@nps.gov (email).
Please include ‘‘1024–0048’’ in the
subject line.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Abstract
The Urban Park and Recreation
Recovery (UPARR) Act (16 U.S.C. 2501
et seq.) was passed as Title X of the
National Parks and Recreation Act of
1978. The UPARR Act authorized the
Secretary of the Interior to establish a
grant program to help economically
distressed urban areas improve
recreation opportunities for their
residents.
We administer the UPARR program in
accordance with regulations at 36 CFR
72 and the UPARR Grant Manual. These
(1) Explain the policies to be followed
for awarding grants; (2) list the
requirements and criteria to be met for
each type of grant and discretionary
eligibility; (3) discuss fundable uses and
limitations; (4) explain how proposals
will be selected and funding; and (5)
describe the application process and
administrative procedures for awarding
grants. The three types of grants
available under the program are:
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Rehabilitation—renovate or
redesign existing close-to-home
recreation facilities.
• Innovation—specific activities that
either increase recreation programs or
improve the efficiency of the local
government to operating existing
programs.
• Planning—development of a
Recovery Action Program plan.
The information collection
requirements associated with the
UPARR Program are currently approved
under three OMB control numbers, all
of which expire on October 31, 2013.
During our review for this renewal, we
identified some additional requirements
that need OMB approval. In this
revision of 1024–0048, we are including
all of the information collection
requirements for the UPARR Program. If
OMB approves this revision, we will
discontinue OMB Control Numbers
1024–0028 and 1024–0089. Congress
has not appropriated funds for new
UPARR grants since FY 2002. We are
not currently accepting applications,
and there are no open grants for which
performance reports must be submitted.
However, we still receive requests for
conversion of properties improved or
developed with UPARR grants through
FY 2002 to other than public recreation
uses. In anticipation of future funding,
we are requesting OMB approval for the
information collection requirements.
With the exception of requests for
conversions of use, we are estimating
one response as a placeholder for each
of the requirements. Following are the
information collection requirements for
the UPARR Program:
(1) Recovery Action Program: In
accordance with 36 CFR 72.10–13, any
eligible jurisdiction or discretionary
applicant desiring to apply for a grant
must develop and submit for NPS
approval, a local Recovery Action
Program (RAP). The RAP documents the
recreation needs of the community and
is linked to the objectives, needs, plans,
and institutional arrangements of the
community. The RAP consists of two
sections, which are the Assessment and
the Action Plan.
The Assessment describes the existing
park and recreation system; issues and
problems; goals and objectives. The
Assessment summarizes the entire
system including: operation and
maintenance; employment and training;
programs and services; rehabilitation of
existing facilities; and the need for new
facilities. The six parts of the
Assessment include: Context; physical
issues; rehabilitation issues; service
issues; management issues; and
conclusions, implications, and issues.
E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM
02MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 85 (Thursday, May 2, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25758-25760]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10374]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLCAD00000.L16100000.DS0000.LXSSB0010000]
Amended Notice of Intent To Clarify the Scope of Analysis of the
Environmental Document and Proposed Plan Amendment in the West Mojave
Planning Area, to the Motorized Vehicle Access Element of the
California Desert Conservation Area Plan, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles and
San Bernardino Counties, CA
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
announces its intent to clarify the scope of the Notice of Intent to
Prepare an
[[Page 25759]]
Environmental Document and Proposed Plan Amendment for the West Mojave
(WEMO) Plan, Motorized Vehicle Access Element, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles
and San Bernardino Counties, CA, which was published in the Federal
Register on September 13, 2011 (76 FR 56466). By this notice, the BLM
is announcing the beginning of a further, more focused scoping process
to solicit public comments and identify issues related to the clarified
scope of the West Mojave (WEMO) Route Network Project Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS)/Plan Amendment as described under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION below.
DATES: This notice initiates public scoping on the clarified scope of
the WEMO Route Network Project EIS/plan amendment and concurrent travel
management designation planning. Comments must be submitted in writing
within 30 days from the publication date of this notice in the Federal
Register. The BLM will provide additional opportunities for public
participation as appropriate.
ADDRESSES: The public may submit comments on the modified scope of the
analysis and related issues, by any of the following methods:
Email: cawemopa@blm.gov.
Web site: https://www.blm.gov/ca/st/en/fo/cdd/west_mojave_wemo.
Fax: 951-697-5299.
Mail: BLM California Desert District Office, 22835 Calle
San Juan de Los Lagos, ATTN: West Mojave Route Network Project, Moreno
Valley, CA 92553-9046
Documents relevant to this proposal may be examined at the
California Desert District Office or Web site (address above), or the
BLM's California State Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edythe Seehafer, telephone 760-252-
6021; address Bureau of Land Management, Barstow Field Office, 2601
Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311; email cawemopa@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 FIRS 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 January 2011, the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California partially remanded the 2006 WEMO
Plan Amendment Record of Decision (ROD) to the BLM and directed the BLM
to amend the California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) Plan and
reconsider route designation throughout the WEMO area, as well as other
specified issues in the WEMO Plan (Center for Biological Diversity v.
US Bureau of Land Management Order Re: Remedy (N.D. Cal. Jan 28,
2011)). By court order, the BLM must issue a revised decision by March
31, 2014. The September 13, 2011 Notice of Intent (NOI) invited
comments on the proposed scope and content of the environmental
document to address the court's issues related to the 2006 WEMO ROD.
The public scoping process for this action has been utilized to
determine relevant issues, impacts, and possible alternatives that
could influence the scope of the environmental analysis, and guide the
entire process from plan decision-making to route designation review in
order to comply with the court order. The BLM conducted two scoping
meetings in Ridgecrest and Barstow, on September 27 and 29, 2011
respectively. The BLM asked for comments on the issues to be addressed,
motor vehicle access amendment alternatives to be considered, decision
criteria for route designation, the best approach to integrate recent
BLM transportation management guidance into the document, and how to
address both plan-level and implementation-level decisions. As a result
of initial scoping, the BLM subsequently held eight working group
meetings in February and March of 2012 to collect additional travel
management input on issues related to planning and implementation for
route designation in specific geographic subregions within the WEMO
area.
The original NOI stated that the plan amendment would:
1. Update and amend the Motorized Vehicle Access Element of the
CDCA Plan. The NOI requested input on those portions of the Element to
be amended, including to reflect current management policy regarding
access management. The plan amendment proposes to eliminate the
``existing routes'' language in the CDCA Plan. This language currently
constrains the development of a travel network in the WEMO area.
2. Identify and analyze alternatives for amending the Motorized
Vehicle Access Element of the CDCA Plan. The NOI indicated that
subsequently, concurrently, or in a combination of both, additional
environmental analysis would address current route designation within
the WEMO sub-regional areas. This analysis would result in new
decisions for each sub-regional area within the WEMO plan area that
would either retain or modify, in whole or in part, current route
designations.
3. Identify processes, decision criteria, and related issues for
designating travel routes within sub-regional areas of the WEMO plan
area. The NOI identified preliminary decision criteria and requested
input on issues and concerns, and best science and technology to
establish viable networks within each subarea.
Clarifications to the original NOI as a result of scoping include
the following:
1. The appropriate analytical document for the plan amendment has
been determined to be an EIS.
2. This plan amendment also proposes to modify Stopping/Parking/
Camping guidelines and other potential area-wide impact minimization
strategies in addition to ``existing routes'' language.
3. The BLM has determined that it would be in the best interest of
public land management to evaluate concurrently the plan amendments and
the activity planning that would adopt route designations and
implementation strategies.
4. In response to the court order BLM will establish a consistent
baseline for route designation.
5. Consistent with current guidance, the plan amendment proposes to
adopt Travel Management Areas and broad goals for these areas to
provide the basis for concurrent travel management activity plans.
6. The activity plans will designate specific travel routes and
trails within the travel management areas as part of the site-specific
implementation planning, and will include consideration of both public
(casual use) and other access needs and opportunities on public lands.
7. This document will amend the CDCA Plan Motor Vehicle Access
Element as it pertains to the West Mojave Planning area. Amendment and
activity plan changes will update and augment the 2006 West Mojave
Plan, through the replacement of Section 2.2.6, updates of Planning and
Regulatory Framework Section 3.1, Affected Environment Sections 3.5,
affected impact analyses, strategies provided in the activity plans,
and elsewhere as appropriate.
8. The BLM generally identified issues of concern in the original
Notice. The following post-2006 ROD issues also will be considered: New
critical habitat, designation of the Old Spanish National Historic
Trail, new wilderness areas, consideration of lands with wilderness
characteristics, changes to access from major rights-of-way and other
large plan amendment proposals
[[Page 25760]]
and decisions, and the proposed transfer of management to the military
of the Johnson Valley OHV Open Area. Several issues were specifically
identified by the court which will be addressed in the document,
including soils, unusual plant assemblages, riparian and water
resources, cultural resources, grazing, air quality in open areas,
cumulative effects, and mitigation. The BLM will evaluate identified
issues to be addressed in the plan amendment, and will place them into
one of three categories:
1. Issues to be resolved in the plan amendment and associated
activity plans;
2. Issues to be resolved through policy or administrative action;
or
3. Issues beyond the scope of this plan amendment.
The BLM will provide an explanation in the Scoping Report or the
draft EIS as to why an issue was placed in category two or three. An
updated inventory of lands with wilderness characteristics for public
lands in the plan area will be completed for analysis in the EIS. The
public is also encouraged to help identify any management questions and
concerns that should be addressed in the clarified scope of the plan.
The BLM will work collaboratively with interested parties to identify
the management decisions that are best suited to local, regional, and
national needs and concerns.
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 1501.7, 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR
1610.2.
Thomas Pogacnik,
Deputy State Director.
[FR Doc. 2013-10374 Filed 5-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-40-P
