Notice of Availability of the Draft Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Arizona, 54408-54409 [2017-24823]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54408
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
of U.S. hunters in the program provides
a clear benefit to the species.
Accordingly, the Service may modify its
determination based on available
information consistent with the
regulatory requirements. In addition, the
Service will reevaluate the status of
African elephants in Zimbabwe before
the end of 2018 and make a new finding
in the beginning of 2019 for, at least, the
2019 hunting season.
Today’s enhancement finding has
been posted at https://www.fws.gov/
international/pdf/enhancement-finding2017-elephant-Zimbabwe.PDF. In
addition, a list of frequently asked
questions regarding the importation of
sport-hunted elephant trophies from
Zimbabwe is available on the Service’s
web page at https://www.fws.gov/
international/permits/by-activity/sporthunted-trophies-elephants.html.
Brenda Tapia,
Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch
of Permits, Division of Management
Authority.
[FR Doc. 2017–24974 Filed 11–16–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[XXX.LLAZG02000.71220000.KD0000
.LVTFA0958340;AZA3116]
Notice of Availability of the Draft Ray
Land Exchange/Plan Amendment
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement, Arizona
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
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),
Gila District, Tucson Field Office has
prepared a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment and by this Notice is
announcing its availability and the
opening of the comment period.
DATES: To ensure comments will be
considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Ray Land
Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft
Supplemental EIS within 90 days
following the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes its Notice
of Availability in the Federal Register.
The BLM will announce future meetings
or hearings and any other public
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
involvement activities at least 15 days
in advance through public notices,
media releases, or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
related to the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Draft Supplemental EIS by
any of the following methods:
• Web site: https://go.usa.gov/xn2FG.
• Email: blm_az_raylandexchange@
blm.gov.
• Fax: 602–417–9454.
• Mail: BLM Arizona State Office,
Attn: Ray Land Exchange, One North
Central Avenue, Suite 800, Phoenix, AZ
85004–4427.
Copies of the Ray Land Exchange/
Plan Amendment Draft Supplemental
EIS are available in the BLM Arizona
State Office at the above address; the
BLM Tucson Field Office at 3201 East
Universal Way, Tucson, AZ 85756; the
BLM Kingman Field Office at 2755
Mission Boulevard, Kingman, AZ
86401; and the Kearny Public Library at
912–A Tilbury Road, Kearny, AZ 85137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Werner, Project Manager,
telephone 602–417–9561; address: One
North Central Avenue, Suite 800,
Phoenix, AZ 85004–4427; email:
mwerner@blm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM
Gila District, Tucson Field Office, is
issuing the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Supplemental EIS to
augment the environmental impact
analysis in the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Final EIS completed by the
BLM in 1999. The BLM issued the Final
EIS for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment in June 1999 and the
Record of Decision in May 2000. The
decision approved a land exchange
between ASARCO LLC (ASARCO) and
the BLM for approximately 10,976 acres
of public lands and federally owned
mineral estate for acquisition by
ASARCO (the Selected Lands) in
exchange for approximately 7,304 acres
of private land owned by ASARCO and
identified by the BLM as desirable for
improving access for hunting and other
recreation (the Offered Lands). The
decision was challenged
administratively and in Federal court,
with the plaintiffs ultimately prevailing
in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in
November 2010. The court concluded
that the BLM violated NEPA and
FLPMA ‘‘in assuming without
explanation that ASARCO would
perform mining operations on the
selected lands in the same manner
regardless of the land exchange’’ (Center
for Biological Diversity v. U.S.
Department of Interior, 623 F.3d 633
[9th Cir. 2010]). The court recognized
that ASARCO has the right to conduct
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mining and related activities under the
General Mining Law, based on
ASARCO’s mining and mill site claims
on the Selected Lands. But the court
believed that the manner and extent of
mining were likely to differ, depending
on whether the Selected Lands are
owned by the United States as public
lands subject to the BLM’s surface use
regulations at 43 CFR 3809 or by
ASARCO as private lands in fee simple,
in which case the BLM’s surface-use
regulations would not apply. The Ninth
Circuit Court stated that ASARCO is not
required to prepare and submit a Mine
Plan of Operations (MPO) for future
activities on the Selected Lands to
complete the exchange. Instead, ‘‘the
BLM must make a meaningful
comparison of the environmental
consequences of ASARCO’s likely
mining operations with and without the
requirement that MPOs be prepared by
ASARCO and approved by the BLM—
that is, with and without the proposed
exchange.’’ Because the BLM did not
perform this ‘‘with and without’’
comparison, the court held that the BLM
did not adequately consider the
environmental impacts of the land
exchange or Resource Management Plan
(RMP) amendments. For the same
reason, the court also held that the BLM
did not properly analyze whether the
public interest will be served by making
the exchange under FLPMA, section
206(a).
In accordance with the courts’ rulings
and remand orders, the Draft
Supplemental EIS for the Ray Land
Exchange provides the ‘‘with and
without’’ comparative analysis found
lacking by the Ninth Circuit Court. The
‘‘with and without’’ analysis compares
two scenarios of potential
environmental impacts on the Selected
Lands from mining operations. One
scenario analyzes potential impacts that
could occur as a result of mining
activities on the Selected Lands if they
are not exchanged and remain under
BLM jurisdiction (i.e., mining occurs
with BLM regulations). The other
scenario analyzes potential impacts that
could occur as a result of mining
activities if the Selected Lands are
exchanged and become privately owned
lands (i.e., mining occurs without BLM
regulations). The Draft Supplemental
EIS also addresses any substantial
changes in the land exchange or plan
amendments and any significant new
information or circumstances that are
relevant to analyzing the impacts of the
land exchange or plan amendments (see
40 CFR 1502.9(c); BLM NEPA
Handbook, Section 5.3 [January 2008]).
The purpose of the proposed Ray
Land Exchange would be to exchange
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
ownership of Federal lands for private
lands. ASARCO proposed the Ray Land
Exchange with the BLM in order to
acquire public lands adjacent to its Ray
Complex (Ray Mine and associated
processing facilities near Hayden) and
in the Casa Grande vicinity. In
exchange, ASARCO is offering to the
BLM private lands that will consolidate
checkerboard land ownership and
improve access to existing Federal land
for traditional uses such as hunting and
other recreation. By acquiring the
Selected Lands, ASARCO is seeking to
consolidate its land holdings within and
near areas of ongoing mineral
development and to use the Selected
Lands to support and expand current
and future mining-related operations.
Through the exchange, the BLM would
have an opportunity to improve
resource management efficiency by
disposing of heavily encumbered,
isolated and difficult to manage public
lands; and acquire lands that will
consolidate ownership patterns in order
to improve public access.
The Proposed Action and alternatives
presented and analyzed in the Ray Land
Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft
Supplemental EIS are generally the
same as those presented and analyzed in
the 1999 Final EIS. The environmental
analysis is based on the foreseeable uses
of the Selected Lands. The Draft
Supplemental EIS includes an analysis
of cumulative impacts to all resources
and land uses, including an evaluation
of potential impacts to Native American
traditional values.
The Proposed Action (Agency
Preferred Alternative) is to complete the
Ray Land Exchange between the BLM
and ASARCO. The Selected Lands total
approximately 10,976 acres and consist
of 31 parcels of public lands located in
Pinal and Gila Counties in south-central
Arizona. Twenty-eight of the parcels
occur in the Middle Gila River Basin
between Mineral Creek to the north, the
White Canyon Wilderness to the
northwest, and the Dripping Spring
Mountains to the east, and the Gila
River to the south. These 28 parcels are
clustered in three areas (the Ray
Complex, Copper Butte/Buckeye, and
Chilito/Hayden) near ASARCO’s Ray
Mine and the communities of Kearny,
Hayden, and Winkelman, Arizona. The
remaining three mineral estate only
parcels are located about 50 miles west
of the Ray Complex, near the
community of Casa Grande in Pinal
County. The Offered Lands total
approximately 7,304 acres and consist
of 18 parcels owned by ASARCO
located in Pinal and Mohave Counties,
also in Arizona. These parcels, which
are presented throughout the Draft
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
Supplemental EIS as five units (two
single parcels and three parcel groups),
include parcels along the Gila and Big
Sandy Rivers, the Black Mountains, and
the Cerbat Mountains. The Offered
Lands are private inholdings within the
jurisdictional boundaries of the Tucson
and Kingman Field Offices of the BLM.
The Draft Supplemental EIS also
includes a No-Action Alternative under
which no land exchange would occur
nor would the Phoenix or Safford
District RMPs need to be amended
under this option. Two additional
action alternatives are also analyzed in
which less than the full amounts of land
would be exchanged: The Buckeye Land
Exchange Action Alternative and the
Copper Butte Land Exchange Action
Alternative. The Buckeye Land
Exchange Alternative involves reducing
the total acreage included in the land
exchange under this alternative. The
amount of the Selected Lands is reduced
from approximately 10,976 acres to
approximately 10,176 acres by
excluding about 800 surface and
subsurface acres in the Copper Butte
area and removing 640 acres of the
McCracken Mountains Parcels from the
Offered Lands. The Copper Butte Land
Exchange Alternative also involves a
reduced acreage exchange from the full
exchange Proposed Action. The Copper
Butte Land Exchange Alternative
involves reducing the total acreage of
the Selected Lands from approximately
10,976 acres to approximately 9,161
acres by excluding surface and
subsurface acres in the Copper Butte
area and removing 1,703 acres of the
McCracken Mountains Parcels from the
Offered Lands.
A plan amendment to the Phoenix
and Safford RMPs is required as the
selected lands have not been designated
for disposal through previous BLM
planning processes. The amendment to
the Phoenix and Safford District RMPs
would change the land tenure
designation from ‘‘retention’’ to
‘‘disposal’’ for a total of approximately
10,339 acres. Specifically:
1. Approximately 9,906 acres
designated in the 1988 Phoenix RMP as
part of the White Canyon Resource
Conservation Area to be changed from
retention to disposal; and
2. Approximately 433 acres
designated in the 1993 Safford District
RMP as part of the former Safford
District Long-Term Management Area to
be changed from retention to disposal.
The BLM was not required to conduct
scoping for the Draft Supplemental EIS.
However, the agency has conducted
public outreach activities to inform the
public and answer questions regarding
the proposed land exchange. The efforts
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54409
included updating the mailing list for
the project, contacting mailing list
persons via postcard and newsletter,
providing a detailed project Web site,
and interviewing key stakeholders to
present the land exchange details and
answer questions.
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, 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.
A. Scott Feldhausen,
Gila District Manager.
[FR Doc. 2017–24823 Filed 11–16–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–32–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLORV0000. L51010000. ER0000.
LVRWH09H0480. 17XL5017AP.
OROR065375. ID036029.HAG 17–0063]
Notice of Availability of the Record of
Decision for the Boardman to
Hemingway Transmission Line Project
and Approved Land-use Plan
Amendments, Oregon
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) announces the
availability of the Record of Decision
(ROD) for the Boardman to Hemingway
Transmission Line Project (B2H Project)
and Approved Land-use Plan
Amendments of the Baker and
Southeastern Oregon Resource
Management Plans (RMPs). The ROD
constitutes the BLM’s final decision
regarding: (1) Approval to grant a Rightof-Way (ROW) to Idaho Power Company
to construct, operate and maintain an
extra-high-voltage, alternating-current
transmission system; and (2) Amending
portions of the BLM Baker and
Southeastern Oregon RMPs.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 221 (Friday, November 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54408-54409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24823]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[XXX.LLAZG02000.71220000.KD0000.LVTFA0958340;AZA3116]
Notice of Availability of the Draft Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Arizona
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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), Gila
District, Tucson Field Office has prepared a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment and by this Notice is announcing its availability and the
opening of the comment period.
DATES: To ensure comments will be considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft
Supplemental EIS within 90 days following the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes its Notice of Availability in the Federal
Register. The BLM will announce future meetings or hearings and any
other public involvement activities at least 15 days in advance through
public notices, media releases, or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments related to the Ray Land Exchange/
Plan Amendment Draft Supplemental EIS by any of the following methods:
Web site: https://go.usa.gov/xn2FG.
Email: blm_az_raylandexchange@blm.gov.
Fax: 602-417-9454.
Mail: BLM Arizona State Office, Attn: Ray Land Exchange,
One North Central Avenue, Suite 800, Phoenix, AZ 85004-4427.
Copies of the Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft Supplemental
EIS are available in the BLM Arizona State Office at the above address;
the BLM Tucson Field Office at 3201 East Universal Way, Tucson, AZ
85756; the BLM Kingman Field Office at 2755 Mission Boulevard, Kingman,
AZ 86401; and the Kearny Public Library at 912-A Tilbury Road, Kearny,
AZ 85137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Werner, Project Manager,
telephone 602-417-9561; address: One North Central Avenue, Suite 800,
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4427; email: mwerner@blm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM Gila District, Tucson Field Office,
is issuing the Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment Supplemental EIS to
augment the environmental impact analysis in the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Final EIS completed by the BLM in 1999. The BLM issued the
Final EIS for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment in June 1999 and the
Record of Decision in May 2000. The decision approved a land exchange
between ASARCO LLC (ASARCO) and the BLM for approximately 10,976 acres
of public lands and federally owned mineral estate for acquisition by
ASARCO (the Selected Lands) in exchange for approximately 7,304 acres
of private land owned by ASARCO and identified by the BLM as desirable
for improving access for hunting and other recreation (the Offered
Lands). The decision was challenged administratively and in Federal
court, with the plaintiffs ultimately prevailing in the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals in November 2010. The court concluded that the BLM
violated NEPA and FLPMA ``in assuming without explanation that ASARCO
would perform mining operations on the selected lands in the same
manner regardless of the land exchange'' (Center for Biological
Diversity v. U.S. Department of Interior, 623 F.3d 633 [9th Cir.
2010]). The court recognized that ASARCO has the right to conduct
mining and related activities under the General Mining Law, based on
ASARCO's mining and mill site claims on the Selected Lands. But the
court believed that the manner and extent of mining were likely to
differ, depending on whether the Selected Lands are owned by the United
States as public lands subject to the BLM's surface use regulations at
43 CFR 3809 or by ASARCO as private lands in fee simple, in which case
the BLM's surface-use regulations would not apply. The Ninth Circuit
Court stated that ASARCO is not required to prepare and submit a Mine
Plan of Operations (MPO) for future activities on the Selected Lands to
complete the exchange. Instead, ``the BLM must make a meaningful
comparison of the environmental consequences of ASARCO's likely mining
operations with and without the requirement that MPOs be prepared by
ASARCO and approved by the BLM--that is, with and without the proposed
exchange.'' Because the BLM did not perform this ``with and without''
comparison, the court held that the BLM did not adequately consider the
environmental impacts of the land exchange or Resource Management Plan
(RMP) amendments. For the same reason, the court also held that the BLM
did not properly analyze whether the public interest will be served by
making the exchange under FLPMA, section 206(a).
In accordance with the courts' rulings and remand orders, the Draft
Supplemental EIS for the Ray Land Exchange provides the ``with and
without'' comparative analysis found lacking by the Ninth Circuit
Court. The ``with and without'' analysis compares two scenarios of
potential environmental impacts on the Selected Lands from mining
operations. One scenario analyzes potential impacts that could occur as
a result of mining activities on the Selected Lands if they are not
exchanged and remain under BLM jurisdiction (i.e., mining occurs with
BLM regulations). The other scenario analyzes potential impacts that
could occur as a result of mining activities if the Selected Lands are
exchanged and become privately owned lands (i.e., mining occurs without
BLM regulations). The Draft Supplemental EIS also addresses any
substantial changes in the land exchange or plan amendments and any
significant new information or circumstances that are relevant to
analyzing the impacts of the land exchange or plan amendments (see 40
CFR 1502.9(c); BLM NEPA Handbook, Section 5.3 [January 2008]).
The purpose of the proposed Ray Land Exchange would be to exchange
[[Page 54409]]
ownership of Federal lands for private lands. ASARCO proposed the Ray
Land Exchange with the BLM in order to acquire public lands adjacent to
its Ray Complex (Ray Mine and associated processing facilities near
Hayden) and in the Casa Grande vicinity. In exchange, ASARCO is
offering to the BLM private lands that will consolidate checkerboard
land ownership and improve access to existing Federal land for
traditional uses such as hunting and other recreation. By acquiring the
Selected Lands, ASARCO is seeking to consolidate its land holdings
within and near areas of ongoing mineral development and to use the
Selected Lands to support and expand current and future mining-related
operations. Through the exchange, the BLM would have an opportunity to
improve resource management efficiency by disposing of heavily
encumbered, isolated and difficult to manage public lands; and acquire
lands that will consolidate ownership patterns in order to improve
public access.
The Proposed Action and alternatives presented and analyzed in the
Ray Land Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft Supplemental EIS are generally
the same as those presented and analyzed in the 1999 Final EIS. The
environmental analysis is based on the foreseeable uses of the Selected
Lands. The Draft Supplemental EIS includes an analysis of cumulative
impacts to all resources and land uses, including an evaluation of
potential impacts to Native American traditional values.
The Proposed Action (Agency Preferred Alternative) is to complete
the Ray Land Exchange between the BLM and ASARCO. The Selected Lands
total approximately 10,976 acres and consist of 31 parcels of public
lands located in Pinal and Gila Counties in south-central Arizona.
Twenty-eight of the parcels occur in the Middle Gila River Basin
between Mineral Creek to the north, the White Canyon Wilderness to the
northwest, and the Dripping Spring Mountains to the east, and the Gila
River to the south. These 28 parcels are clustered in three areas (the
Ray Complex, Copper Butte/Buckeye, and Chilito/Hayden) near ASARCO's
Ray Mine and the communities of Kearny, Hayden, and Winkelman, Arizona.
The remaining three mineral estate only parcels are located about 50
miles west of the Ray Complex, near the community of Casa Grande in
Pinal County. The Offered Lands total approximately 7,304 acres and
consist of 18 parcels owned by ASARCO located in Pinal and Mohave
Counties, also in Arizona. These parcels, which are presented
throughout the Draft Supplemental EIS as five units (two single parcels
and three parcel groups), include parcels along the Gila and Big Sandy
Rivers, the Black Mountains, and the Cerbat Mountains. The Offered
Lands are private inholdings within the jurisdictional boundaries of
the Tucson and Kingman Field Offices of the BLM.
The Draft Supplemental EIS also includes a No-Action Alternative
under which no land exchange would occur nor would the Phoenix or
Safford District RMPs need to be amended under this option. Two
additional action alternatives are also analyzed in which less than the
full amounts of land would be exchanged: The Buckeye Land Exchange
Action Alternative and the Copper Butte Land Exchange Action
Alternative. The Buckeye Land Exchange Alternative involves reducing
the total acreage included in the land exchange under this alternative.
The amount of the Selected Lands is reduced from approximately 10,976
acres to approximately 10,176 acres by excluding about 800 surface and
subsurface acres in the Copper Butte area and removing 640 acres of the
McCracken Mountains Parcels from the Offered Lands. The Copper Butte
Land Exchange Alternative also involves a reduced acreage exchange from
the full exchange Proposed Action. The Copper Butte Land Exchange
Alternative involves reducing the total acreage of the Selected Lands
from approximately 10,976 acres to approximately 9,161 acres by
excluding surface and subsurface acres in the Copper Butte area and
removing 1,703 acres of the McCracken Mountains Parcels from the
Offered Lands.
A plan amendment to the Phoenix and Safford RMPs is required as the
selected lands have not been designated for disposal through previous
BLM planning processes. The amendment to the Phoenix and Safford
District RMPs would change the land tenure designation from
``retention'' to ``disposal'' for a total of approximately 10,339
acres. Specifically:
1. Approximately 9,906 acres designated in the 1988 Phoenix RMP as
part of the White Canyon Resource Conservation Area to be changed from
retention to disposal; and
2. Approximately 433 acres designated in the 1993 Safford District
RMP as part of the former Safford District Long-Term Management Area to
be changed from retention to disposal.
The BLM was not required to conduct scoping for the Draft Supplemental
EIS. However, the agency has conducted public outreach activities to
inform the public and answer questions regarding the proposed land
exchange. The efforts included updating the mailing list for the
project, contacting mailing list persons via postcard and newsletter,
providing a detailed project Web site, and interviewing key
stakeholders to present the land exchange details and answer questions.
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, 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.
A. Scott Feldhausen,
Gila District Manager.
[FR Doc. 2017-24823 Filed 11-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
