Grand Ditch Breach Restoration, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado, 32441 [2013-12848]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 104 / Thursday, May 30, 2013 / Notices
Affairs Specialist for the Twin Falls
District BLM at (208) 736–2352.
Dated: May 20, 2013.
Mel M. Meier,
District Manager.
[FR Doc. 2013–12835 Filed 5–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS–IMR–ROMO–11943; PPIMROMO60
PAN00AN53.NM0000]
Grand Ditch Breach Restoration, Final
Environmental Impact Statement,
Rocky Mountain National Park,
Colorado
National Park Service,
Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the
Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the Grand Ditch Breach Restoration,
Rocky Mountain National Park.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park
Service announces the availability of a
Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the Grand Ditch Breach Restoration,
Rocky Mountain National Park,
Colorado.
DATES: The National Park Service will
execute a Record of Decision (ROD) no
sooner than 30 days following
publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency of the Notice of
Availability of the Final Environmental
Impact Statement.
ADDRESSES: Information will be
available for public inspection online at
https://parkplanning.nps.gov/romo, in
the office of the Superintendent,
Vaughn Baker, 1000 US Highway 36,
Estes Park, CO 80517–8397, 970–586–
1200 and at the Public Information
Office, Rocky Mountain National Park,
1000 US Highway 36, Estes Park,
Colorado 80517–8397.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Public Information Office, Rocky
Mountain National Park, 1000 US
Highway 36, Estes Park, Colorado
80517–8397, (970) 586–1206.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
document describes five management
alternatives including a no-action
alternative and the National Park
Service preferred alternative. The
anticipated environmental impacts of
those alternatives are analyzed. The
final document also includes responses
to substantive comments from the
public, cooperating agencies, and
government agencies. The no-action
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:25 May 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
32441
alternative, alternative A, would extend
existing conditions and management
trends into the future. This alternative
serves as a basis of comparison for
evaluating the action alternatives.
Minimal restoration, alternative B,
would emphasize less intensive
management activity to restore portions
of the impacted area. This alternative
would focus actions on areas that are
unstable and present a high potential of
continued degradation of ecosystem
resources and services. High restoration,
alternative C, would involve more
intensive management actions over large
portions of the impacted area. This
alternative would focus actions on
unstable areas that present a high to
moderate potential of continued
degradation of existing ecosystem
resources and services. The preferred
alternative, alternative D, would
emphasize the removal of large debris
deposits in the alluvial fan area and in
the Lulu City wetland. Actions would
be conducted to stabilize limited areas
of unstable slopes and banks throughout
the upper portions of the restoration
area. Hydrology through the Lulu City
wetland would be restored in the
historical central channel through
removal of large deposits of debris,
relying on the historical channel to
transport river flow. Small-scale
motorized equipment would be
employed for stabilization and
revegetation activities, while larger
equipment would be employed for
excavation of large debris deposits and
reconfiguration of the Colorado River
through the Lulu City wetland. This
alternative would include stabilization
of zone 1A under the preferred option,
option 1. Maximum restoration,
alternative E, would involve extensive
management activity and use of
motorized equipment over large
portions of the impacted area to restore
the damage.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dated: December 20, 2012.
John Wessels,
Director, Intermountain Region, National
Park Service.
ALASKA
[FR Doc. 2013–12848 Filed 5–29–13; 8:45 am]
MINNESOTA
BILLING CODE 4312–CB–P
St. Louis County
PO 00000
National Park Service
[NPS–WASO–NRNHL–13048;
PPWOCRADI0, PCU00RP14.R50000]
National Register of Historic Places;
Notification of Pending Nominations
and Related Actions
Nominations for the following
properties being considered for listing
or related actions in the National
Register were received by the National
Park Service before May 4, 2013.
Pursuant to section 60.13 of 36 CFR part
60, written comments are being
accepted concerning the significance of
the nominated properties under the
National Register criteria for evaluation.
Comments may be forwarded by United
States Postal Service, to the National
Register of Historic Places, National
Park Service, 1849 C St. NW., MS 2280,
Washington, DC 20240; by all other
carriers, National Register of Historic
Places, National Park Service, 1201 Eye
St. NW., 8th floor, Washington, DC
20005; or by fax, 202–371–6447. Written
or faxed comments should be submitted
by June 14, 2013. 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.
Dated: May 13, 2013.
J. Paul Loether,
Chief, National Register of Historic Places/
National Historic Landmarks Program.
Lake and Peninsula Borough-Census Area
LIBBY’S NO. 23 (bristol bay double ender),
1 Park Pl., Port Alsworth, 13000379
Duluth and Iron Range Railroad Company
Passenger Station, 404 Pine St., Tower,
13000380
MISSOURI
Jackson County
Pratt and Whitney Plant Complex, 1500 &
2000 E. Bannister Rd., Kansas City,
13000381
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\30MYN1.SGM
30MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 104 (Thursday, May 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 32441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12848]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS-IMR-ROMO-11943; PPIMROMO60 PAN00AN53.NM0000]
Grand Ditch Breach Restoration, Final Environmental Impact
Statement, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado
AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Grand Ditch Breach Restoration, Rocky Mountain
National Park.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability
of a Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Grand Ditch Breach
Restoration, Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado.
DATES: The National Park Service will execute a Record of Decision
(ROD) no sooner than 30 days following publication by the Environmental
Protection Agency of the Notice of Availability of the Final
Environmental Impact Statement.
ADDRESSES: Information will be available for public inspection online
at https://parkplanning.nps.gov/romo, in the office of the
Superintendent, Vaughn Baker, 1000 US Highway 36, Estes Park, CO 80517-
8397, 970-586-1200 and at the Public Information Office, Rocky Mountain
National Park, 1000 US Highway 36, Estes Park, Colorado 80517-8397.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Public Information Office, Rocky
Mountain National Park, 1000 US Highway 36, Estes Park, Colorado 80517-
8397, (970) 586-1206.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The document describes five management
alternatives including a no-action alternative and the National Park
Service preferred alternative. The anticipated environmental impacts of
those alternatives are analyzed. The final document also includes
responses to substantive comments from the public, cooperating
agencies, and government agencies. The no-action alternative,
alternative A, would extend existing conditions and management trends
into the future. This alternative serves as a basis of comparison for
evaluating the action alternatives. Minimal restoration, alternative B,
would emphasize less intensive management activity to restore portions
of the impacted area. This alternative would focus actions on areas
that are unstable and present a high potential of continued degradation
of ecosystem resources and services. High restoration, alternative C,
would involve more intensive management actions over large portions of
the impacted area. This alternative would focus actions on unstable
areas that present a high to moderate potential of continued
degradation of existing ecosystem resources and services. The preferred
alternative, alternative D, would emphasize the removal of large debris
deposits in the alluvial fan area and in the Lulu City wetland. Actions
would be conducted to stabilize limited areas of unstable slopes and
banks throughout the upper portions of the restoration area. Hydrology
through the Lulu City wetland would be restored in the historical
central channel through removal of large deposits of debris, relying on
the historical channel to transport river flow. Small-scale motorized
equipment would be employed for stabilization and revegetation
activities, while larger equipment would be employed for excavation of
large debris deposits and reconfiguration of the Colorado River through
the Lulu City wetland. This alternative would include stabilization of
zone 1A under the preferred option, option 1. Maximum restoration,
alternative E, would involve extensive management activity and use of
motorized equipment over large portions of the impacted area to restore
the damage.
Dated: December 20, 2012.
John Wessels,
Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-12848 Filed 5-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-CB-P