Notice of Availability of the Moab Master Leasing Plan and Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendments/Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Moab and Monticello Field Offices, UT, 48840-48841 [2016-17592]
Download as PDF
48840
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2016 / Notices
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.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 1076–0162.
Title: Navajo Partitioned Lands
Grazing Permits, 25 CFR 161.
Brief Description of Collection:
Submission of information is required
for Navajo Nation Tribal members
wanting to obtain, modify, or assign a
grazing permit on Navajo partitioned
lands, and the BIA will seek
concurrence from the Navajo Nation to
issue grazing permits.
Type of Review: Revision of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents: Navajo Nation Tribal
members and the Navajo Nation.
Number of Respondents: 700.
Number of Responses: 3,121.
Frequency of Response: Annually.
Obligation to Respond: Responses are
required to obtain or maintain a benefit.
Estimated Time per Response: Varies
from quarter of an hour to one hour,
with an average of less than one hour
per response.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
2,123.
Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour
Dollar Cost: $0.
Elizabeth K. Appel,
Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs and
Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016–17546 Filed 7–25–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[16X L1109AF LLUTY0100000
L16100000.DQ0000 LXSS030J0000 24 1A]
Notice of Availability of the Moab
Master Leasing Plan and Proposed
Resource Management Plan
Amendments/Final Environmental
Impact Statement for the Moab and
Monticello Field Offices, UT
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended, and the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended, the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:28 Jul 25, 2016
Jkt 238001
prepared the Moab Master Leasing Plan
(MLP) and Proposed Resource
Management Plan (RMP) Amendments/
Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the Moab and Monticello Field
Offices in the Canyon Country District,
Utah. The MLP/Proposed RMP
Amendments/Final EIS (MLP/FEIS)
proposes amending the RMPs for the
Moab and Monticello Field Offices and
by this notice the BLM is announcing its
availability.
DATES: BLM planning regulations state
that any person who meets the
conditions as described in the
regulations may protest the BLM’s MLP/
FEIS. A person who meets the
conditions and files a protest must file
the protest within 30 days of the date
that the Environmental Protection
Agency publishes its Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Moab MLP
and Proposed RMP Amendments/Final
EIS have been sent to affected Federal,
State, and local government agencies,
affected tribal governments, and to other
stakeholders. Copies of the MLP/
Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS
are available for public inspection at the
following locations:
• Bureau of Land Management, Utah
State Office, 440 West 200 South, Suite
500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
• Bureau of Land Management, Moab
Field Office, 82 East Dogwood, Moab,
Utah 84532
• Bureau of Land Management,
Monticello Field Office, 365 North
Main, Monticello, Utah 84535
Interested persons may also review
the MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/
Final EIS and accompanying
background documents on the internet
at: https://www.blm.gov/21jd. All
protests must be in writing and mailed
to one of the following addresses:
Regular Mail: BLM Director (210),
Attention: Protest Coordinator, P.O. Box
71383, Washington, DC 20024–1383.
Overnight Delivery: BLM Director
(210), Attention: Protest Coordinator, 20
M Street SE., Room 2134LM,
Washington, DC 20003
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brent Northrup, Project Manager, BLM
Moab Field Office, telephone 435–259–
2151; 82 East Dogwood, Moab, Utah
84532; email Brent_Northrup@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
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
individual. You will receive a reply
during normal business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MLP/
Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS
would change the management
direction for the leasing of oil, gas and
potash in portions of the Moab and
Monticello plan areas. The MLP
planning area encompasses 785,000
acres of public lands in southeast Utah
in Grand and San Juan Counties. The
planning area is located south of
Interstate 70 and adjoins the town of
Moab and Arches National Park. The
western boundary is the Green River
and the northeastern boundary of
Canyonlands National Park. To the
south of Moab, the planning area
includes the Indian Creek/Lockhart
Basin/Hatch Point area between
Canyonlands National Park and
Highway 191. Land uses and values
within the planning area include
substantial potash resources, proven oil
and gas resources, world class scenery,
and both developed and back-country
recreational opportunities. In addition,
the planning area is immediately
adjacent to Arches and Canyonlands
National Parks. This unique
combination of values means the
planning area contributes to the local
economy both through tourism and
mineral extraction.
The BLM has prepared a MLP/
Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS
in accordance with the BLM
Washington Office Instruction
Memorandum (IM No. 2010–117: Oil
and Gas Leasing Reform—Land Use
Planning and Lease Parcel Reviews
(May 17, 2010)) and the BLM Handbook
H–1624–1: Planning for Fluid Mineral
Resources, Chapter V, Master Leasing
Plans (January 28, 2013). As the
Handbook explains, an MLP is a plan
that includes analysis of a distinct
geographic area that takes a closelyfocused look at RMP decisions
pertaining to leasing and post-leasing
development of the area. Although the
IM and the Handbook pertain to oil and
gas leasing decisions, the BLM
determined that the MLP concepts are
also applicable to potash leasing
decisions due to the nature of potash
exploration and development in the
planning area. Therefore, the MLP
process provides additional planning
and analysis for areas prior to new
leasing of oil and gas and potash. The
MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final
EIS analyzes likely mineral
development scenarios and land use
plan alternatives with varying
mitigation levels for leasing.
The MLP/Proposed RMP
Amendments/Final EIS includes a range
E:\FR\FM\26JYN1.SGM
26JYN1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 26, 2016 / Notices
of management alternatives designed to
address management challenges and
issues raised during scoping concerning
mineral leasing decisions in the area.
The four alternatives are:
(1) Alternative A is the No Action
alternative and represents the
continuation of existing mineral leasing
management (oil, gas, and potash).
Alternative A allows for oil, gas, and
potash leasing and development to
occur on the same tracts of land where
it is consistent with current leasing
decisions in the RMPs.
(2) Alternative B provides for mineral
leasing and development outside of
areas that are protected for high scenic
quality (including public lands visible
from Arches and Canyonlands National
Parks), high-use recreation areas, and
other sensitive resources with
stipulations that minimize surface
disturbance and associated potential
resource impacts. Mineral leasing
decisions are divided into two options
specified as Alternative B1 and
Alternative B2. In Alternative B1,
surface impacts would be minimized by
separating new leasing of the two
commodities (oil/gas and potash),
limiting the density of mineral
development, and locating potash
processing facilities in areas identified
with the least amount of sensitive
resources. Potash leasing would involve
a phased approach and would be
prioritized within identified areas.
Alternative B2 provides for only oil and
gas leasing; no new potash leasing
would occur. Alternative B2 would also
minimize surface impacts by limiting
the density of oil and gas development.
(3) Alternative C provides for only oil
and gas leasing; no potash leasing
would occur. This alternative affords
the greatest protection to areas with
high scenic quality, recreational uses,
and special designations, the BLMmanaged lands adjacent to Arches and
Canyonlands National Parks, and other
sensitive resources.
(4) Alternative D is the BLM’s
proposed plan and provides for both oil
and gas leasing and potash leasing.
Mineral development would be
precluded in many areas with high
scenic quality, in some high use
recreation areas, specifically designated
areas, and in other areas with sensitive
resources. Outside of these areas,
surface impacts would be minimized by
separating leasing of the two
commodities (oil/gas and potash),
locating potash processing facilities in
areas with the least amount of sensitive
resources, and limiting the density of
mineral development. Potash leasing
would involve a phased approach and
would be prioritized within identified
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:28 Jul 25, 2016
Jkt 238001
areas. The proposed plan would provide
operational flexibility for mineral
leasing and development through some
specific exceptions and would close the
BLM-managed lands adjacent to Arches
and Canyonlands National Parks to
mineral leasing and development. In the
proposed plan, a controlled surface use
stipulation requiring compensatory
mitigation would be applied to sensitive
resources where onsite mitigation alone
may not be sufficient to adequately
mitigate impacts. Best Management
Practices (BMPs) have been developed
that include components of the draft
compensatory mitigation policy such as
the priority for mitigating impacts, types
of mitigation, long term durability, and
monitoring. The BMPs also identify
Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative
projects as potential locations for
compensatory mitigation outside the
area of impact. Utah’s Watershed
Restoration Initiative is a partnershipdriven effort which includes State and
Federal agencies with a mission to
conserve, restore, and manage
ecosystems in priority areas across Utah.
Comments on the MLP and Draft RMP
Amendments/Draft EIS (MLP/DEIS)
received from the public and internal
BLM review were considered and
incorporated, as appropriate, into the
proposed plan amendments and Final
EIS. Public comments resulted in the
addition of clarifying text, but did not
significantly change proposed land-use
plan decisions. Adjustments and
clarifications have also been made to the
preferred alternative in the Draft EIS,
which is now presented as the proposed
plan in the Moab MLP/FEIS.
Instructions for filing a protest with
the BLM Director regarding the Moab
MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final
EIS may be found in the ‘‘Dear Reader’’
letter of the Moab MLP/Proposed RMP
Amendments/Final EIS, and in the
Federal regulations at 43 CFR 1610.5–2.
All protests must be in writing and
mailed to the appropriate address, as set
forth in the ADDRESSES section above.
Emailed protests will not be accepted as
valid protests unless the protesting
party also provides the original letter by
either regular mail or overnight delivery
postmarked by the close of the protest
period. Under these conditions, the
BLM will consider the email as an
advance copy and it will receive full
consideration. If you wish to provide
the BLM with such advance
notification, please direct emails to
protest@blm.gov.
Before including your phone number,
email address, or other personal
identifying information in your protest,
you should be aware that your entire
protest—including your personal
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48841
identifying information—may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can ask us in your protest 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, 43 CFR 1610.5.
Jenna Whitlock,
Acting State Director.
[FR Doc. 2016–17592 Filed 7–25–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–DQ–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Indian Gaming Commission
Update to Notice of Availability of a
Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement for the Jamul Indian
Village Proposed Gaming Management
Agreement, San Diego County,
California
National Indian Gaming
Commission (NIGC), Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability (NOA).
AGENCY:
In accordance with Section
102(2)(C) of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq., the NIGC, in cooperation with the
Jamul Indian Village has prepared a
Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (Final SEIS) for the
proposed Gaming Management
Agreement (GMA) between the Jamul
Indian Village (JIV) and San Diego
Gaming Ventures (SDGV). If approved,
the GMA would allow SDGV to assume
responsibility for operation and
management of the JIV Gaming Facility
located in San Diego County, California.
The Final SEIS addresses the effects of
GMA approval and the No Action
Alternative, which assumes no GMA, is
approved. The SEIS also updates the
environmental baseline given the time
that has passed and the changes that
have been made to the scope of the
Proposed Action, which was originally
addressed in the 2003 Final EIS.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
further information or to request a copy
of the Final SEIS, please contact:
Andrew Mendoza, Staff Attorney,
National Indian Gaming Commission
Office of the General Counsel 1849 C
Street NW., Mail Stop #1621,
Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 202–
632–7003: Facsimile: 202–632–7066:
email: Andrew Mendoza@nigc.gov.
Availability of the Final SEIS: The
Final SEIS is available for public review
at the following locations:
The Rancho San Diego Public Library,
11555 Via Rancho San Diego, El Cajon,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26JYN1.SGM
26JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 26, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48840-48841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17592]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[16X L1109AF LLUTY0100000 L16100000.DQ0000 LXSS030J0000 24 1A]
Notice of Availability of the Moab Master Leasing Plan and
Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendments/Final Environmental Impact
Statement for the Moab and Monticello Field Offices, UT
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act
of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has
prepared the Moab Master Leasing Plan (MLP) and Proposed Resource
Management Plan (RMP) Amendments/Final Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the Moab and Monticello Field Offices in the Canyon Country
District, Utah. The MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS (MLP/FEIS)
proposes amending the RMPs for the Moab and Monticello Field Offices
and by this notice the BLM is announcing its availability.
DATES: BLM planning regulations state that any person who meets the
conditions as described in the regulations may protest the BLM's MLP/
FEIS. A person who meets the conditions and files a protest must file
the protest within 30 days of the date that the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes its Notice of Availability in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Moab MLP and Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS
have been sent to affected Federal, State, and local government
agencies, affected tribal governments, and to other stakeholders.
Copies of the MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS are available for
public inspection at the following locations:
Bureau of Land Management, Utah State Office, 440 West 200
South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
Bureau of Land Management, Moab Field Office, 82 East
Dogwood, Moab, Utah 84532
Bureau of Land Management, Monticello Field Office, 365
North Main, Monticello, Utah 84535
Interested persons may also review the MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/
Final EIS and accompanying background documents on the internet at:
https://www.blm.gov/21jd. All protests must be in writing and mailed to
one of the following addresses:
Regular Mail: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest Coordinator,
P.O. Box 71383, Washington, DC 20024-1383.
Overnight Delivery: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest
Coordinator, 20 M Street SE., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20003
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brent Northrup, Project Manager, BLM
Moab Field Office, telephone 435-259-2151; 82 East Dogwood, Moab, Utah
84532; email Brent_Northrup@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: The MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS
would change the management direction for the leasing of oil, gas and
potash in portions of the Moab and Monticello plan areas. The MLP
planning area encompasses 785,000 acres of public lands in southeast
Utah in Grand and San Juan Counties. The planning area is located south
of Interstate 70 and adjoins the town of Moab and Arches National Park.
The western boundary is the Green River and the northeastern boundary
of Canyonlands National Park. To the south of Moab, the planning area
includes the Indian Creek/Lockhart Basin/Hatch Point area between
Canyonlands National Park and Highway 191. Land uses and values within
the planning area include substantial potash resources, proven oil and
gas resources, world class scenery, and both developed and back-country
recreational opportunities. In addition, the planning area is
immediately adjacent to Arches and Canyonlands National Parks. This
unique combination of values means the planning area contributes to the
local economy both through tourism and mineral extraction.
The BLM has prepared a MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS in
accordance with the BLM Washington Office Instruction Memorandum (IM
No. 2010-117: Oil and Gas Leasing Reform--Land Use Planning and Lease
Parcel Reviews (May 17, 2010)) and the BLM Handbook H-1624-1: Planning
for Fluid Mineral Resources, Chapter V, Master Leasing Plans (January
28, 2013). As the Handbook explains, an MLP is a plan that includes
analysis of a distinct geographic area that takes a closely-focused
look at RMP decisions pertaining to leasing and post-leasing
development of the area. Although the IM and the Handbook pertain to
oil and gas leasing decisions, the BLM determined that the MLP concepts
are also applicable to potash leasing decisions due to the nature of
potash exploration and development in the planning area. Therefore, the
MLP process provides additional planning and analysis for areas prior
to new leasing of oil and gas and potash. The MLP/Proposed RMP
Amendments/Final EIS analyzes likely mineral development scenarios and
land use plan alternatives with varying mitigation levels for leasing.
The MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS includes a range
[[Page 48841]]
of management alternatives designed to address management challenges
and issues raised during scoping concerning mineral leasing decisions
in the area. The four alternatives are:
(1) Alternative A is the No Action alternative and represents the
continuation of existing mineral leasing management (oil, gas, and
potash). Alternative A allows for oil, gas, and potash leasing and
development to occur on the same tracts of land where it is consistent
with current leasing decisions in the RMPs.
(2) Alternative B provides for mineral leasing and development
outside of areas that are protected for high scenic quality (including
public lands visible from Arches and Canyonlands National Parks), high-
use recreation areas, and other sensitive resources with stipulations
that minimize surface disturbance and associated potential resource
impacts. Mineral leasing decisions are divided into two options
specified as Alternative B1 and Alternative B2. In Alternative B1,
surface impacts would be minimized by separating new leasing of the two
commodities (oil/gas and potash), limiting the density of mineral
development, and locating potash processing facilities in areas
identified with the least amount of sensitive resources. Potash leasing
would involve a phased approach and would be prioritized within
identified areas. Alternative B2 provides for only oil and gas leasing;
no new potash leasing would occur. Alternative B2 would also minimize
surface impacts by limiting the density of oil and gas development.
(3) Alternative C provides for only oil and gas leasing; no potash
leasing would occur. This alternative affords the greatest protection
to areas with high scenic quality, recreational uses, and special
designations, the BLM-managed lands adjacent to Arches and Canyonlands
National Parks, and other sensitive resources.
(4) Alternative D is the BLM's proposed plan and provides for both
oil and gas leasing and potash leasing. Mineral development would be
precluded in many areas with high scenic quality, in some high use
recreation areas, specifically designated areas, and in other areas
with sensitive resources. Outside of these areas, surface impacts would
be minimized by separating leasing of the two commodities (oil/gas and
potash), locating potash processing facilities in areas with the least
amount of sensitive resources, and limiting the density of mineral
development. Potash leasing would involve a phased approach and would
be prioritized within identified areas. The proposed plan would provide
operational flexibility for mineral leasing and development through
some specific exceptions and would close the BLM-managed lands adjacent
to Arches and Canyonlands National Parks to mineral leasing and
development. In the proposed plan, a controlled surface use stipulation
requiring compensatory mitigation would be applied to sensitive
resources where onsite mitigation alone may not be sufficient to
adequately mitigate impacts. Best Management Practices (BMPs) have been
developed that include components of the draft compensatory mitigation
policy such as the priority for mitigating impacts, types of
mitigation, long term durability, and monitoring. The BMPs also
identify Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative projects as potential
locations for compensatory mitigation outside the area of impact.
Utah's Watershed Restoration Initiative is a partnership-driven effort
which includes State and Federal agencies with a mission to conserve,
restore, and manage ecosystems in priority areas across Utah. Comments
on the MLP and Draft RMP Amendments/Draft EIS (MLP/DEIS) received from
the public and internal BLM review were considered and incorporated, as
appropriate, into the proposed plan amendments and Final EIS. Public
comments resulted in the addition of clarifying text, but did not
significantly change proposed land-use plan decisions. Adjustments and
clarifications have also been made to the preferred alternative in the
Draft EIS, which is now presented as the proposed plan in the Moab MLP/
FEIS.
Instructions for filing a protest with the BLM Director regarding
the Moab MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final EIS may be found in the
``Dear Reader'' letter of the Moab MLP/Proposed RMP Amendments/Final
EIS, and in the Federal regulations at 43 CFR 1610.5-2. All protests
must be in writing and mailed to the appropriate address, as set forth
in the ADDRESSES section above. Emailed protests will not be accepted
as valid protests unless the protesting party also provides the
original letter by either regular mail or overnight delivery postmarked
by the close of the protest period. Under these conditions, the BLM
will consider the email as an advance copy and it will receive full
consideration. If you wish to provide the BLM with such advance
notification, please direct emails to protest@blm.gov.
Before including your phone number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware
that your entire protest--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your protest 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, 43 CFR
1610.5.
Jenna Whitlock,
Acting State Director.
[FR Doc. 2016-17592 Filed 7-25-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P