National Park Service 2007 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 151 - 200 of 373
Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Advisory Commission; Notice of Meetings
Notice is hereby given in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act that meetings of the Cedar Creek and Belle Grove National Historical Park Advisory Commission will be held to discuss the development of the Park's general management plan. Dates and Locations: September 20, 2007, at the Warren County Government Center, 220 N. Commerce Ave., Front Royal, VA; December 13, 2007, at the Strasburg Town Hall Council Chambers, 174 East King St., Strasburg, VA; March 20, 2008, at the Middletown Town Hall Council Chambers, 7875 Church St., Middletown, VA; and June 19, 2008, at the Warren County Government Center. All meetings will convene at 9 a.m. and are open to the public.
Making Motion Pictures, Television Productions, Soundtracks or Taking Still Photographs on Certain Areas Under the Jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior
The Department of the Interior (DOI) proposes to revise its filming regulations to implement legislation that directs establishment of reasonable fees for commercial filming activities or similar projects, such as still photography, and to respond to applicants for commercial filming or still photography permits in a timely manner.
General Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Petrified Forest National Park, Arizona
Under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for a General Management Plan (GMP) amendment for Petrified Forest National Park. The park is currently managed under a GMP that was completed in 1993. This plan describes a proposed boundary expansion for the park of approximately 93,000 acres. However, the 1993 GMP does not prescribe management for the proposed expansion lands. The GMP was revised in 2004 to address specific aspects of the park's management; this GMP Revision also does not address management activities for proposed expansion lands. Public Law 108-430 was passed by congress and signed by the President in December 2004. This Act expanded Petrified Forest National Park boundaries by approximately 125,000 acres, and directed the NPS to prepare a management plan for the new park lands within three years. Planning for the new lands is the focus of this GMP amendment and its associated EIS. The GMP amendment will establish the overall direction for park expansion lands, setting broad management goals for the area for the next 15 to 20 years. Among the topics that will be addressed are protection of natural and cultural resources, protection of riparian resources, appropriate range of visitor uses, impacts of visitor uses, adequacy of park infrastructure, visitor access to the park expansion area, education and interpretive efforts, and external pressures on the park. Management zones that were established in the current GMP will be applied to expansion lands. These zones outline the kinds of resource management activities, visitor activities, and developments that would be appropriate in the expansion lands. A range of reasonable alternatives for managing the park, including a no-action alternative and a preferred alternative, will be developed through the planning process and included in the EIS. The EIS will evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the alternatives. As the first phase of the planning and EIS process, the National Park Service is beginning to scope the issues to be addressed in the GMP amendment. All interested persons, organizations, and agencies are encouraged to submit comments and suggestions regarding the issues or concerns the GMP amendment should address, including a suitable range of alternatives and appropriate mitigating measures, and the nature and extent of potential environmental impacts.
Consultation and Dialogue On Regulations Regarding The Disposition Of Unclaimed Native American Human Remains, Funerary Objects, Sacred Objects, Or Objects Of Cultural Patrimony Excavated Or Discovered On Federal Or Tribal Lands After November 16, 1990, Pursuant To Provisions Of The Native American Graves Protection And Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)
This notice of consultation announces three consultation meetings and a facilitated dialogue session (recommended by the Review Committee) that will be held to obtain additional oral and written recommendations on regulations to be drafted regarding the disposition of unclaimed Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or objects of cultural patrimony that are excavated or discovered on Federal or tribal lands after November 16, 1990. Previous consultation meetings were held November, 2005, and April, 2007.
30-Day Notice of Submission to the Office of Management and Budget; Opportunity for Public Comment
Under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 CFR Part 1320, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, the National Park Service (NPS) invites public comments on a proposed new collection of information (OMB 1024-XXXX).
Ecological Restoration Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Bandelier National Monument, New Mexico
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 Ecological Restoration Plan for Bandelier National Monument, New Mexico. Alternative B was selected as the park's preferred alternative; it maximizes work efficiency and minimizes resource impacts by implementing restoration treatments in the most systematic and timely fashion possible given available funding. The purpose of the Ecological Restoration Plan is to re-establish healthy, sustainable vegetative conditions within the pinon-juniper woodland and to mitigate soil erosion that threatens the cultural resources for which Bandelier National Monument was established and specifically set aside to preserve.
Jackson Hole Airport Use Agreement Extension, Environmental Impact Statement, Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Jackson Hole Airport Use Agreement Extension, Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming. This effort addresses a request from the Jackson Hole Airport Board to amend the use agreement between the Department of the Interior and the Airport Board in order to ensure that the airport remains eligible for funding through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Alternatives to be considered include Alternative 1: No ActionThe airport would continue operations under the existing use agreement which currently has an expiration date of April 27, 2033; Alternative 2: Extend Agreement Jackson Hole Airport Board proposal to extend the use agreement for an additional two 10-year terms, bringing the expiration date to April 27, 2053; and Alternative 3: Update and Extend AgreementExtend the use agreement for an additional two 10-year terms with minor modifications as mutually agreed to by the NPS and the Airport Board. The Jackson Hole Airport is located on 533 acres of land within Grand Teton National Park. The airport operates under the terms and conditions of a 1983 use agreement between the Department of the Interior and the Jackson Hole Airport Board. The 1983 agreement was for a primary term of 30 years, with options for two 10-year extensions, both of which have been exercised. The agreement also includes a provision that further extensions, amendments, or modifications could be negotiated by the parties on mutually satisfactory terms, and that the parties agree that upon expiration of the agreement, a mutually satisfactory extension could be negotiated. The FAA requires that airports have use agreements of 20 years or more in order to remain eligible for Airport Improvement Program funds. An extension of the existing use agreement is needed to provide assurance that the airport will remain eligible for funding beyond the year 2013. In November 2006, a public scoping notice soliciting public comments was circulated describing the purpose and need for the project. Based on comments received and subsequent data gathered, the NPS has determined the preparation of an EIS is warranted. Preliminary EIS impact topics include: Natural soundscape, air quality, water quality, wildlife/T&E species, visual quality/dark skies, public health and safety, visitor use & experience, transportation planning, socioeconomics, park & airport operations.
Notice of Boundary Amendment-Harpers Ferry National Historical Park
Notice is hereby given that the National Park Service (NPS) is amending the boundary of Harpers Ferry National Historical Park to include one additional tract of land containing 0.749 of an acre.
National Park Service Subsistence Resource Commission; Meeting
The NPS announces the SRC meeting schedule for the following areas: Denali National Park, Lake Clark National Park, Aniakchak National Monument and Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. The purpose of each meeting is to develop and continue work on NPS subsistence hunting program recommendations and other related subsistence management issues. Each meeting is open to the public and will have time allocated for public testimony. The public is welcomed to present written or oral comments to the SRC. Each meeting will be recorded and a summary will be available upon request from each Superintendent for public inspection approximately six weeks after each meeting. The NPS SRC program is authorized under Title VIII, Section 808 of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, Public Law 96-487, to operate in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. Dates: The Denali National Park SRC meeting will be held on Monday, August 27, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Standard Time. Location: Cantwell Community Center, Cantwell, AK. For Further Information Contact: Amy Craver, Subsistence Manager, telephone: (907) 683-9544, or Paul Anderson, Superintendent, telephone: (907) 683-2294, at Denali National Park and Preserve, P.O. Box 9, Denali Park, AK 99755. Dates: The Lake Clark National Park SRC meeting will be held on Thursday, September 20, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Standard Time. Location: Nondalton Community Hall, Nondalton, AK. For Further Information Contact: Mary McBurney, Subsistence Manager, telephone: (907) 235-7891, or Joel Hard, Superintendent, and Michelle Ravenmoon, Subsistence Coordinator, telephone: (907) 781-2218, at Lake Clark National Park and Preserve, 1 Park Place, Port Alsworth, AK 99653. Dates: The Aniakchak National Monument SRC meeting will be held on Monday, September 24, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Standard Time. Location: Port Heiden Community Hall, Port Heiden, AK. For Further Information Contact: Mary McBurney, Subsistence Manager, telephone: (907) 235-7891, or Ralph Moore, Superintendent, telephone: (907) 246-3305, at Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, P.O. Box 7, King Salmon, AK 99613. Dates: The Wrangell-St. Elias National Park SRC meeting will be held on Wednesday, October, 10, 2007, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Alaska Standard Time. Location: Chitina Community Hall, Chitina, AK. For Further Information Contact: Barbara Cellarius, Subsistence Manager, telephone: (907) 822-7236, or Meg Jensen, Superintendent, telephone: (907) 822-5234, at Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve, P.O. Box 439, Copper Center, AK 99573.
Cape Cod National Seashore Hunting Program, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Cape Cod National Seashore, MA
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Services (NPS) announces the availability of a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Cape Cod National Seashore Hunting Program, Cape Cod National Seashore (CCNS), Massachusetts. The purpose of the FEIS is to finalize the documentation of the environmental consequences of alternative strategies for managing hunting at CCNS. The FEIS evaluates three (3) alternatives for managing hunting: Alternative ANo Action describes the effects of continuing the hunting program as it was prior to a court decision to enjoin the pheasant stocking and hunting program. Hunting would continue in accordance with the seasons and regulations established by the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (MDFW), and in accordance with the existing rules established by Cape Cod National Seashore pertaining to the time of year hunting is allowed, the species that can be hunted, and no-hunting zones. Under this alternative, the pheasant hunting and stocking program would be re-established. Alternative BDevelop a Modified Hunting Program (the preferred alternative) describes the effects of modifying the hunting program in a manner that would retain hunting as part of CCNS's cultural heritage while addressing concerns raised by non-hunting visitors. The modifications were derived from input received during public scoping, and subsequently refined based on comments on the Draft EIS. Element 1: This element would increase traditional hunting opportunities for native upland game bird species. Specifically, the park's rules would be revised to allow the State's spring eastern turkey hunt to occur within the park. Additionally, this element would include developing and implementing cultural landscape restoration activities that are expected to improve habitat quality for upland game birds, particularly northern bobwhite quail. Element 2: An adaptive management approach would be used to phase out the pheasant stocking and hunting program as opportunities to hunt native upland game birds increase. The success of heathland and grassland management, called for by the cultural restoration plan, will be used as an indicator of native species hunting opportunity. This element would result in the end of pheasant stocking and hunting at CCNS within 14 to 17 years. In no case will pheasant stocking continue beyond 17 years. Element 3: This element would simplify the scope of hunting areas, and would designate hunting-permitted areas versus the current policy which allows hunting in all areas except where specifically prohibited. The hunting-permitted areas would be delineated based on the existing 500-foot no-hunting buffers around paved roads and buildings, expanding the no-hunting buffers around bicycle paths from 150 feet to 500 feet, and eliminating the small patches and thin slivers of area that cannot practicably be hunted. This element would provide an added safety precaution protective of visitors using the bike paths; should result in more predictable areas where hunting is likely to be encountered and where it will not; would provide consistent buffers for hunting set- backs from roads, buildings, and bike paths; would facilitate more efficient monitoring by law enforcement staff; and would result in little reduction in hunting opportunities. Element 4: Hunting-related outreach to hunting and non-hunting users would be expanded. Outreach to non-hunting visitors would focus on where and when hunting occurs in the park, where visitors can go to avoid hunting, safety precautions when in or adjacent to hunting areas, how to report any unlawful behavior or safety concerns, and the importance of courteous and respectful behavior to all users. Outreach to hunters would also focus on where and when hunting is permitted in the park, hunting regulations, how to report any unlawful behavior or safety concerns, and the importance of courteous and respectful behavior to all users. Element 5: This element provides for cooperative and expanded game species monitoring by Cape Cod National Seashore and the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. The Seashore and the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife would integrate monitoring efforts, and seek additional resources as needed, to expand monitoring of the abundance and harvest of deer, eastern cottontail rabbits, eastern wild turkeys, and northern bobwhite quail. These agencies would also coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to review emerging information on the status and distribution of New England cottontail rabbits on outer Cape Cod, and determine if action is necessary to protect this sensitive species within the Seashore. Alternative CEliminate Hunting describes the effects of eliminating hunting at Cape Cod National Seashore. A sub-element of Alternative C would eliminate only the pheasant program while retaining the other aspects of the hunting program. In April of 2006, the NPS issued a Draft EIS for agency and public review and comment. The comment period opened on April 21, 2006 with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) publication of a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register, and closed on June 19, 2006, 60 days later. During that review period the NPS held two public meetings to provide agencies and the public the opportunity to provide oral comment on the draft document. Comments were received in the form of letters and e-mails, and at the two public meetings. All substantive comments have been addressed in the ``Consultation and Coordination'' chapter of the FEIS.
Final Environmental Impact Statement, Systems Conveyance and Operations Program, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Clark County, NV; Notice of Approval of Record of Decision
Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended) and the implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 1505.2), the Department of the Interior, National Park Service has prepared, and the Regional Director, Pacific West Region has approved, the Record of Decision for the Clean Water Coalition's proposed System Conveyance and Operations Program. The formal no-action period was officially initiated February 23, 2007, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Federal Register notification of the filing of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Decision: The Final EIS analyzed a no-action alternative, a process improvement alternative, and three pipeline alternatives that would variously redirect a portion of highly treated effluent from the Las Vegas Wash into the Boulder Basin. The selected alternativeBoulder Islands North pipeline alternative combines use of current conventional treatment processes, plant optimization, and increased treatment. In addition, a pipeline will be constructed to convey highly treated effluent from three treatment facilities to a discharge location near the Boulder Islands in Lake Mead. There will be flexibility in discharge conveyed depending upon lake conditions and the objectives identified in the Boulder Basin Adaptive Management Plan which was developed and agreed to by all involved parties. As documented in the Final EIS, this course of action was deemed to be ``environmentally preferred''. The Final EIS, and previously in the Draft EIS (the latter was released in September 2005), assessed the full spectrum of foreseeable environmental consequences, and appropriate mitigation measures identified, for each alternative considered. Beginning with early scoping, through the preparation of the Draft and Final EIS, numerous public meetings were hosted. Approximately 500 oral and written comments were received during the scoping phase or in response to the Draft EIS. Key coordination, consultations, or other contacts which aided in preparing the Draft and Final EIS involved (but were not limited to) the Bureau of Reclamation, cities of Las Vegas and Henderson, Clark County Water Reclamation District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Nevada State Historic Preservation Office, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Local communities, county and city officials, and interested organizations were contacted extensively during initial scoping and throughout the conservation planning and environmental impact analysis process. Copies: Interested parties desiring to review the Record of Decision may obtain a complete copy by contacting the Superintendent, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, 601 Nevada Highway, Boulder City, NV 89005; or via telephone request at (702) 293-8920.
General Management Plan, Environmental Impact Statement, Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site, Colorado
Under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service (NPS) is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS) for a general management plan (GMP) for the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site. This effort will analyze the impacts of a broad range of design alternatives for the national historic site. This effort will result in a comprehensive general management plan that provides a framework for making management decisions regarding the preservation of natural and cultural resources, visitor use and interpretation and development of appropriate park facilities. This plan will be developed in cooperation with the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribe of Oklahoma, the Northern Arapaho Tribe of Wyoming, the Northern Cheyenne Tribe of Montana, and the State of Colorado. Alternatives to be considered include no-action, the proposed action and other reasonable alternatives. The park superintendent will initiate consultation with congressional delegations, tribal representatives, and state and local agencies on the development of the plan. Consultation with these agencies will continue throughout the planning process. Public involvement in the planning process will include newsletters and open houses that inform the public of the project and provide opportunities for input; press releases in the local media; newsletters and open houses to present and solicit input on the alternatives; a public review draft of the general management plan and environmental impact statement and public meetings to provide additional opportunities to comment on the draft plan. Public involvement is essential for the development of creative and sustainable management alternatives for the national historic site. A briefing statement has been prepared that summarizes the specific elements of the general management planning process and the EIS. Copies of that information may be obtained from: Superintendent, Alexa Roberts, Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site, P.O. Box 249, Eads, CO 81036.
Final Environmental Impact Statement; Reconstruction of the Furnace Creek Water Collection System; Death Valley National Park, Inyo County, CA; Notice of Approval of Record of Decision
Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended) and the implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR part 1505.2), the Department of the Interior, National Park Service has prepared, and the Regional Director, Pacific West Region has approved the Record of Decision (and Statement of Findings for Wetlands and Floodplains) for the reconstruction of the Furnace Creek water collection system at Death Valley Natioal Park. Reconstructing the water collection system affords the park with the opportunity to provide a reliable quality and quantity of potable water to the users in the Furnace Creek area, to promote conservation of biological and cultural resources in the Texas-Travertine Springs area, and to enhance water resource protection and management in the Furnace Creek area. The no-action ``30-day wait period'' was officially initiated July 14, 2006, with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Federal Register notification of the filing of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. Decision: As soon as practicable the park will begin to implement the Preferred Alternative (with minor modifications from Alternative C as described in the Draft and Final EIS); as documented in the EIS, this alternative was deemed to be the ``environmentally preferred'' course of action and it was further determined that implementation of the selected actions will not constitute an impairment of park resources and values. In doing so, the park can rebuild the outdated water collection system in the Furnace Creek area to supply safe and reliable potable and nonpotable water to the park's main visitor use area, separate the potable and nonpotable water systems in the project area, and provide nonpotable water from the Inn Tunnel and a relocated Furnace Creek Wash collection gallery. The selected actions will provide potable water from two to three new groundwater wells in the Texas Springs Syncline, and will treat water collected for potable purposes using a reverse osmosis water treatment plant. The concentrate water generated from the water treatment process will be conveyed to the park's sewage treatment plant for evaporation. Non-potable water will be collected from Furnace Creek Wash and the Inn Tunnel. Water for riparian restoration purposes will be released from Texas Springs and Travertine Springs Lines 1, 2, 3, and 4. To meet maximum daily flow requirements, Alternative 3 will collect 600 gallons per minute (GPM) of potable water and 900 gpm of nonpotable water, and release approximately 770 gpm of riparian water.
Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for an Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan (ORV Management Plan) for Cape Lookout National Seashore (Seashore), NC
Notice is hereby given in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4332) and Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR 1506.6), the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service (NPS) will prepare an ORV Management Plan/DEIS. The ORV Management Plan/DEIS will be used to guide the management and control of ORVs at the Seashore for approximately the next 15 to 20 years. It will also form the basis for a special regulation that will regulate ORV use at the Seashore. The ORV Management Plan/DEIS will assess potential environmental impacts associated with a range of reasonable alternatives for managing ORV impacts on park resources such as threatened and endangered species, soils, wetlands, wildlife, and cultural resources. Socioeconomic impacts and effects on visitor experience and public safety will also be analyzed. In addition, the plan will focus on issues that have a direct bearing on ORV management, including management of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern, as well as predator management.
Notice of Emergency Approval of a 6 Month Study Package; 60-Day Notice of Intent To Inform the Public of This Collection of Information; National Park Service's Evaluation of Pilot Interventions To Increase Healthful Physical Activity in Parks
Under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 CFR Part 1320, Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements, the National Park Service (NPS) has requested and received emergency approval on the collection of information: NPS' Evaluation of Pilot Interventions to Increase Healthful Physical Activity in Parks (OMB 1024-0253). The NPS invites public comments on the emergency approval of this currently approved collection.
Big Cypress National Preserve Off-Road Vehicle Advisory Committee; Notice of Establishment
The Secretary of the Interior is giving notice of the establishment of the Big Cypress National Preserve Off-Road Vehicle Advisory Committee to offer recommendations, alternatives and possible solutions to management of off-road vehicles at Big Cypress National Preserve.
General Management Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Saguaro National Park, AZ
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 Draft Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan for Saguaro National Park, Arizona.
60-day Notice of Intention To Request Clearance of Collection of Information; Opportunity for Public Comment
Under the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and 5 CFR part 1320, Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, the National Park Service (NPS) invites public comments on an extension of a currently approved information collection (OMB 1024-0037).
60-Day Notice of Intention To Request Clearance of Collection of Information; Opportunity for Public Comment
Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.) and 5 CFR part 1320, the National Park Service (NPS) invites public comments on a revision of a currently approved information collection (OMB 1024-0038).
Ellis Island Development Concept Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Statue of Liberty National Monument and Ellis Island, New York and New Jersey
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability of the Record of Decision for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Ellis Island Development Concept Plan, Statue of Liberty National Monument and Ellis Island, New York and New Jersey. On May 14, 2007, the Director, Northeast Region approved the Record of Decision for this undertaking. As soon as practicable, the National Park Service will begin to implement the selected Alternative (i.e., the preferred alternative in the FEIS issued on April 6, 2007). The National Park Service will work with its nonprofit partner for the project, Save Ellis Island, Inc to develop the Ellis Island Institute as the primary adaptive reuse of the Island's remaining abandoned buildings. The Institute will provide cultural, interpretive, and educational programs and activities related to the park's historic themes. An associated small conference facility and overnight accommodations will be developed, financed and managed by a professional hospitality business partner working with the nonprofit partner. The facility would host meetings, retreats, and workshops that would primarily focus upon issues such as immigration, world migration, public health, culture and ethnic diversity. In accordance with the National Park Service's Partnership Construction Process, additional market analysis and feasibility studies will be completed to test and confirm the economic and programmatic viability of the project. The primary purpose of this undertaking, having evaluated the full range of foreseeable environmental consequences of three (3) alternative management strategies presented in the FEIS, is to rehabilitate and adaptively reuse 30 deteriorating buildings on Ellis Island, and provide limited vehicular service and emergency access, while preserving cultural resource values and enhancing visitor appreciation of the immigration function and history pertaining to Ellis Island. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a finding on impairment of park resources and values, a listing of measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public involvement in the decision-making process.
Rocky Mountain National Park; Proposed Exchange of Federal Land for Non-Federal Land, All Within Larimer County, Colorado
Pursuant to the authority contained in the Act of October 26, 2005 (Pub. L. 109-93, 119 Stat. 2104), the Secretary of the Interior has been authorized to acquire certain lands by exchange, and is authorized, upon completion of said exchange, to revise the boundaries of Rocky Mountain National Park accordingly.
Flight 93 National Memorial Advisory Commission
This notice sets forth the date of the July 28, 2007 meeting of the Flight 93 Advisory Commission.
Resource Protection Study, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Curecanti National Recreation Area, CO
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 Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Resource Protection Study for Curecanti National Recreation Area, Colorado.
Temporary Concession Contract for Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, CO
Pursuant to 36 CFR 51.24, public notice is hereby given that the National Park Service proposes to award a temporary concession contract for the sale of firewood and incidental visitor items within Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve, Colorado, for a term not to exceed 2 years and 8 months, from May 1, 2007 through December 31, 2009. This action is necessary to avoid an interruption of visitor services.
30-Day Notice of Submission of Study Package to the Office of Management and Budget; Opportunity for Public Comment (OMB # 1024-0236)
Under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D)] and 5 CFR part 1320, Reporting and Record Keeping Requirements, the National Park Service (NPS) invites public comments on a revision of a currently approved collection of information (OMB 1024-0236). The 30-Day Federal Register Notice for this collection of information that was published on June 26, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 122, Pages 35065-35066), was published in error and should be recognized as an incorrect version. The correct publication of the 30-Day Federal Register Notice for this collection of information was published on June 25, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 121, Pages 34722-34723), and should be recognized as the correct version. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this matter, please contact Mr. Leonard E. Stowe, NPS, Information Collection Clearance Officer, 1849 C St., NW. (2605), Washington, DC 20240; or via e-mail at leonard stowe@nps.gov.
Fire Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, Saguaro National Park, AZ
Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 83 Stat. 852, 853, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability of the Record of Decision for the Fire Management Plan, Saguaro National Park, Arizona. On April 25, 2007, the Director, Intermountain Region approved the Record of Decision for the project. As soon as practicable, the National Park Service will begin to implement the Preferred Alternative contained in the FEIS issued on October 7, 2005. The following course of action will occur under the preferred alternative, a fire management program utilizing wildland fire use fires, prescribed fire, non-fire treatments and suppression. This course of action and 2 alternatives were analyzed in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements. The full range of foreseeable environmental consequences was assessed, and appropriate mitigating measures were identified. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a description of the environmentally preferable alternative, a finding on impairment of park resources and values, a listing of measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public involvement in the decision-making process.
Availability of Funding for Acquisition of Civil War Battlefield Land
The National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of funds to assist States and local communities in acquiring for permanent protection lands, or interests in lands, at significant Civil War battlefield sites. Under Public Law (Pub. L.) 110-5, making appropriations to the Department of Interior in FY 2007, Congress appropriated $4 million from the Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) to assist non-federal efforts to acquire and preserve Civil War battlefield lands. NPS seeks proposals from State and local governmentsor from qualified non- profit historic preservation organizations acting through an agency of State or local governmentfor the non-federal acquisition of significant Civil War battlefield land. Project proposals are subject to the following requirements. 1. These funds must be matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis with non-federal dollars. That is, the federal dollars can pay for no more than one-half of the acquisition cost. 2. The purchase price must be supported by a qualified appraisal that has been approved by NPS as meeting the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions. 3. The battlefield land acquired with the assistance of these funds must be permanently protected from inappropriate development through conveyance of a perpetual easement to a public historic preservation agency. NPS will give priority to acquisition of land, or interests in land, within the ``core'' areas of Priority I and Priority II battlefields, as identified by the Congressionally-chartered Civil War Sites Advisory Commission (CWSAC). Among potential projects, NPS will give highest priority to acquisition projects that can be completed within the immediate future. Proposals may be submitted at any time, and must include: (1) CWSAC Priority Listing and Map The applicant must include the CWSAC priority listing and document that the proposed acquisition lies within the battlefield core and/or study area, as defined by the CWSAC. Applicants must submit a U.S. Geological Survey quadrangle map with the boundaries of the proposed acquisition clearly drawn. (2) Threat to the Battlefield The applicant must demonstrate that the battlefield is imminently threatened. The nature, the extent, and the level of severity of the threat to the battlefield must be clearly and convincingly stated. Further, the applicant must describe how and to what extent the proposed acquisition addresses the described threat. In cases where there is minimal threat, applications will be considered if there is a stated compelling reason why the acquisition of the property at this time is a better use of LWCF funds than waiting for a more threatened property. (3) Ability To Secure Non-Federal Match An applicant that has secured matching funds must list all sources of those funds. The applicant must certify that the non-federal matching funds are either ``in-hand'' or otherwise committed in writing at the time of application. Third-party matching share commitments must be documented by letter from the third party. Matching share commitments contingent upon receipt of federal funds from this program are acceptable. An applicant that has not yet secured matching funds must submit a specific, credible plan for raising the necessary matching funds. The plan must identify potential sources of funds. It must include a proposed schedule, usually not more than 120 days, for securing funds or commitments of funds. (4) Immediacy of Acquisition The applicant must demonstrate that the owner of the property to be acquired is willing to sell the land at an agreed-upon price. Acceptable documentation includes a contract or contingent contract to buy the land, or a letter from the owner indicating willingness to enter into such a contract at a specified price. The applicant should include a schedule for completion of the acquisition within the near future.
Notice of Availability of a Record of Decision on the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park General Management Plan Amendment
Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 83 Stat. 852, 853, the National Park Service (NPS) announces the availability of the Record of Decision (ROD) on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park General Management Plan Amendment, Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, Ohio. On May 16, the Regional Director, Midwest Region, approved the ROD for the project. As soon as practicable, the NPS will begin to implement the Preferred Alternative contained in the Final EIS issued on April 13. The following course of action will occur under the Preferred Alternative. The park will continue to serve traditional visitors to national parks; however, the primary goal will be to increase regional involvement, particularly in interpretation, education, and outreach. Visitors can expect an active participatory experience that will broaden and expand the park's literary and aviation significance. There will be a new at-grade entrance to the Huffman Prairie Flying Field and a maintenance facility shared by the park and partners. This course of action and two other alternatives were analyzed in the Draft and Final EIS. The full range of foreseeable environmental consequences was assessed and appropriate mitigating measures were identified. The ROD includes a statement of the decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, a description of the environmentally preferable alternative, a finding on impairment of park resources and values, a listing of measures to minimize environmental harm, an overview of public involvement in the decisionmaking process, and a conclusion.
Final Environmental Impact Statement and Environmental Impact Report; Giacomini Wetlands Restoration Project; Point Reyes National Seashore, Marin County, CA; Notice of Availability
Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended), and the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR part 1500-1508), the National Park Service, Department of the Interior, has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) identifying and evaluating the no-action alternative and four action alternatives for the restoration of the Giacomini wetlands. When approved, the plan will guide the National Park Service in restoration and public access actions for lands at the headwaters of Tomales Bay, Marin County, California. Because some of the proposed restoration project area includes state, county and private lands, the document also fulfills California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements as a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The California State Lands Commission (CALC) is the CEQA lead agency for this project. Through the FEIS/EIR, the potential impacts of the five alternatives are assessed and, where appropriate, measures to avoid or reduce the intensity of potential effects are identified. Three preliminary restoration options that were considered, but rejected because they did not achieve restoration objectives or were infeasible, are also described in the FEIS/EIR. Project Planning Background: Point Reyes National Seashore is a unit of the National Park Service (NPS) located in western Marin County, California. It was established by Congress on September 13, 1962, ``to save and preserve, for the purpose of public recreation, benefit, and inspiration, a portion of the diminishing seashore of the United States that remains undeveloped'' (Pub. L. 87-657). A large portion of Tomales Bay watershed lands were acquired by the NPS in the 1960s and 1970s for establishment of two neighboring parksPoint Reyes National Seashore (Seashore) and Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA). In 1980, the boundary for GGNRA was expanded to include the Waldo Giacomini Ranch (Giacomini Ranch) and the eastern portion of Tomales Bay. The Giacomini Ranch falls within the north district of the GGNRA, which is administered by the Seashore. The Seashore and CALC are proposing to restore historic wetlands at Giacomini Ranch in Tomales Bay, an embayment that borders the Seashore to the east and north. The Giacomini Ranch property was once part of a large tidal marsh complex at the southern end of Tomales Bay that also encompassed portions of Olema Marsh (a 60-acre freshwater marsh that is partially owned by the NPS). The Giacomini property was diked in 1946 and has been used by the Waldo Giacomini family as a dairy since then. The property was purchased from the Giacomini family in 2000. Partial funding for the purchase came from the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), which was under obligation to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to mitigate for impacts resulting from the Lone Tree road repair along State Route 1 conducted in the early 1990s. The CCC eventually allowed CalTrans to fulfill mitigation obligations by making funds available to the NPS to purchase, restore, and manage a replacement wetland site. While the NPS is obligated under its agreement with CalTrans and CCC to mitigate only a total of 3.6 acres, the Seashore believes that the potential value of the historic salt marsh is significant not only to the NPS and its resource conservation objectives, but to the Tomales Bay watershed ecosystem as a whole. Tomales Bay was recently declared impaired for sediment, nutrients, and fecal coliform by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board under Sec. 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. Coastal wetlands act as both a food source and filtering system for estuarine and marine systems, and the loss of these wetlands in many parts of the bay has contributed to this designation. The diking of the Giacomini property resulted in the loss of hydrologic connectivity and diminished delta functionality for more than 50 percent of the coastal tidal wetlands present in Tomales Bay in the late 1800s. Restoration would reestablish hydrologic connectivity between Tomales Bay and the project area, resulting in increased wetland functionality. The project purpose and goals reflect a broad ecosystem-level approach to restoration. The purpose of the proposed project is to restore natural hydrologic processes within a significant portion of the project area, thereby promoting restoration of ecological processes and functions. Three goals, which further support the overall purpose, were also developed, as follows: Restore natural, self-sustaining tidal, fluvial (streamflow), and groundwater hydrologic processes, thereby enabling reestablishment of some of the ecological processes and functions associated with wetland and riparian areas, such as water quality improvement, floodwater storage, food chain support, and wildlife habitat. Pursue a watershed-based approach to restoration so as to emphasize opportunities to improve ecological conditions within the entire Tomales Bay watershed, not just in the project area itself. To the extent possible, incorporate opportunities for the public to experience and enjoy the restoration process as long as opportunities do not conflict with the project's purpose or with NPS, CALC, or other agency legislation or policies. For these reasons, the NPS and CALC propose to restore natural hydrologic and ecological processes on most or all of the 563-acre property. The NPS and CALC developed a range of alternatives for accomplishing this restoration project that encompass a spectrum of hydrologic and topographic changes. However, there are a series of activities that would be conducted under all five alternatives, including: Discontinuation of agricultural land management on the property, removal of general agricultural infrastructure and buildings from upland areas, and periodic maintenance of creeks to ensure that sediment deposition does not elevate flood risk to adjacent properties. In addition, the Giacomini family would remove all personal property from the project area, including worker housing trailers near Mesa Road. Water rights to Lagunitas Creek, acquired as part of the transfer of ownership, would be dedicated to in-stream flow. The NPS would also enter into a lease agreement with the CALC for leasing of subtidal lands in Lagunitas Creek within the project area. Finally, the NPS will be working with the USGS on an effort to expand the tidewater Goby population within the southern portions of Tomales Bay. Proposed Giacomini Wetlands Restoration: Extensive Restoration of the Giacomini Ranch East Pasture, Full Restoration of the West Pasture, and Restoration of Olema Marsh with Limited Public Access (Alternative D). This alternative has been determined to be ``environmentally preferred'', and involves complete removal of levees in both the West and East Pasture. In general, this alternative builds upon the actions proposed in Alternative B and Alternative C (see below) by fully realigning one of the leveed creeks within the Giacomini Ranch; excavating a portion of the ranch pasture into active intertidal marshplain and floodplain; increasing the amount of culvert replacement to improve hydraulic connectivity, streamflow, and passage of salmonid species; and increasing active revegetation and invasive non-native plant removal efforts. In addition, this alternative incorporates adaptive restoration of Olema Marsh (which is located south of Giacomini Ranch and White House Pool and is owned by Audubon Canyon Ranch (ACR) and the NPS); this would include a phased approach to shallow channel excavation, vegetated berm removal, and potential replacement of Levee Road and/or Bear Valley Road culverts in the future should initial restoration efforts not achieve the desired degree of success. Public access components of Alternative D include an improved spur trail leading to the edge of the Dairy Mesa; an improved spur trail extension of the existing Tomales Bay Trail; an improved spur trail on the southern perimeter following the existing alignment of an informal social path; and an ADA-compliant path in White House Pool County Park. The NPS would also pursue working with Marin County (through separate environmental compliance) to consider additional public access facilities on the southern perimeter of the project area, including reevaluation of a trail along Levee Road, extension of a trail to Inverness Park, and, should other options not prove viable, a non- vehicular bridge across Lagunitas Creek. Alternatives to Proposed Project: Under the No Action Alternative, levees, tidegates, and culverts in the Giacomini Ranch will remain. An 11-acre area will be restored on the northeast corner of the east pasture to satisfy mitigation requirements for aquatic habitat impacts caused by CalTrans due to road repairs on State Route 1 in Marin County in exchange for the NPS receiving monies to purchase and restore the Giacomini Ranch. The remainder of the levees in the East Pasture and West Pasture would no longer be maintained. Under the No Action Alternative only, there is potential for limited grazing, with consultation conducted under a separate compliance process. Olema Marsh would not be restored, and there would be no new public access facilities. Alternative ALimited Restoration of the Giacomini Ranch East Pasture Only with Expanded Public Access, Including Culverted Earthen Fill Trail on Eastern Perimeter. This alternative involves selective breaching of the East Pasture levee, while levees and tidegates in the West Pasture would not be removed. A limited amount of tidal channel creation, creek bank grading, and revegetation would also be performed in the East Pasture. Most of the actions under this alternative focus on removing agricultural infrastructure such as filling of ditches, ripping of compacted roads, fence removal, and removal of pumps, pipelines, and concrete spillways, as well as removal of ranch buildings. For future public access, the southern perimeter trail would include a prefabricated bridge across Lagunitas Creek, near the old summer dam location across from White House Pool County Park. The bridge design would place footings outside of the active channel, so as to not impinge on hydrologic processes. Future extension of the southern perimeter trail, in collaboration with the County of Marin, would connect White House Pool County Park with a path along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard (that would either run alongside the road or move off the road at the southern end of the unrestored West Pasture onto a low-elevation boardwalk that would join back with Sir Francis Drake Boulevard in Inverness Park). Other infrastructure constructed is a culverted berm through-trail on the eastern perimeter of the East Pasture. Alternative BModerate Restoration of the Giacomini Ranch East Pasture and Limited Restoration of the West Pasture with Expanded Public Access, Including Boardwalk Trail on the Eastern Perimeter. This alternative would completely remove the East Pasture levees and create several breaches in the West Pasture levee, as well as remove the tidegate on Fish Hatchery Creek. More tidal channel creation, grading, and revegetation would occur than under Alternative A. There would be no activities taken at Olema Marsh. Most of the new public access facilities would continue to be limited to the eastern and southern perimeters of the East Pasture, including construction of the pedestrian access bridge across Lagunitas Creek near the old summer dam, and extension of the southern perimeter trail to Inverness Park. The culverted berm through-trail on the eastern perimeter in Alternative A would instead be a boardwalk. On the West Pasture north levee, a viewing area would replace the existing informal trail. Alternative CFull Restoration of the Giacomini Ranch East and West Pastures and Restoration of Olema Marsh, with Moderate Public Access. This alternative involves complete removal of levees in both the West and East Pasture. In general, this alternative would result in more tidal channel creation, grading, and revegetation than Alternative B. In addition, the project boundary is expanded to include Olema Marsh, which is located south of the Giacomini Ranch and White House Pool and is owned by ACR and the NPS. Olema Marsh and the Giacomini Ranch once formed an integrated tidal wetland complex. In Alternative C, there would be an adaptive approach for Olema Marsh restoration that would include phased shallow channel excavation and vegetated berm removal. Levee Road and Bear Valley Road culverts could be replaced in the future should initial restoration efforts not achieve the desired degree of success. Public access components include the southern perimeter path and proposed future trails as described under Alternative A and Alternative B, but there would be two spur trails rather than a through-trail on the eastern perimeter of the Giacomini Ranch. Principal Differences Between the Draft and Final EIS/EIR: Change in Preferred Alternative: The alternative preferred by the NPS and CALC has been changed to Alternative D from Alternative C. The lead agencies initially chose Alternative C as the Preferred Alternative as it appeared to best meet both wetland restoration goals and community public access needs. During public review of the DEIS/ EIR, a large number of responses from the public, organizations, and agencies advocated selecting Alternative D because it was more compatible with restoration and would have less traffic, noise, pollution, and land use impacts. Changes to Alternative D: Alternative D has been modified slightly in the FEIS/EIR in response to public feedback so as to slightly decrease the degree of excavation, to remove eucalyptus from Tomasini Creek, and to construct an ADA-compliant trail and viewing platform at the nearby White House Pool County Park. In addition, this alternative now also incorporates the option for NPS to collaborate with Marin County in a separate environmental process on possible additional public access facilities on the southern perimeter of the project area (as noted above). Change in Impact Determinations: Because of refinement of construction scheduling and project design (identified in Chapter 2), the NPS and CALC have re-assessed some levels of impact identified, although none of these changes results in any ``Significant, Unavoidable Impacts'', such that all major impacts are mitigated to moderate or lesser intensities. Construction-related air quality impacts under Alternative C have been reduced to moderate, although Alternative D still would have major or substantial impacts that are mitigated to moderate levels through implementation of recommended Best Management Practices. Alternative A and Alternative B would have major impacts on riparian habitat due to construction of the eastern perimeter trail that could conflict with state and local policies on riparian habitat protection, but these impacts would be mitigated to minor or moderate through active and passive revegetation efforts. Major restoration actions in Olema Marsh identified as part of the adaptive restoration under Alternative C and Alternative D such as culvert replacement would not be implemented until the NPS can confirm these actions would not cause major impacts to municipal water supply through increasing water salinities in the portion of the Lagunitas Creek that is adjacent to municipal groundwater wells. Summary of Public Engagement: On September 23, 2002, a Notice of Intent (NOI) to conduct public scoping to inform preparation of an EIS was published in the Federal Register. On September 25, 2002, a copy of the NOI and scoping information was sent to 45 landowners adjacent to the project area, and 163 persons and organizations on a public review request list maintained by the Seashore. On October 4, 2002, the NOI was sent to the Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse for distribution to relevant state agencies (SCH 2002114002). Following agreement by CALC to act as the lead CEQA agency, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for preparation of a joint EIS/ EIR was prepared by CALC, and distributed to the State Clearinghouse, which circulated the NOP between May 29 and June 30, 2003. The extensive public scoping period also closed on June 30, 2003. Oral comments were heard at a public information meeting at the October 19, 2002 Advisory Commission held at the Point Reyes Dance Palace where approximately 30 to 40 members of the public attended. In addition to the oral comments obtained, approximately 86 individuals or private organizations provided written comments regarding the proposed restoration. Regulatory scoping meetings were conducted on November 6, 2002 and November 8, 2002 during the public scoping period. The NPS and CALC received comments from seven local, state, or federal agencies. After the public scoping phase concluded on June 30, 2003, a staff report was prepared that summarized all information derived from the public scoping process. After a series of internal post-scoping discussions in spring 2004, the NPS and CALC hosted a series of information meetings with regulatory and local and state agencies, adjacent landowners, and local technical experts in the field of wetland restoration, to present and receive feedback on preliminary restoration and public access concepts. This phase culminated in a public workshop on June 22, 2004, at the Seashore Red Barn attended by more than 110 people. Following the June public workshop, all interested individuals and organizations were encouraged to submit comments to the NPS and CALC on the restoration concepts and scope of the proposed DEIS/EIR. Through July 23, 2004 written letters or e-mails from 58 individuals and 14 private organizations were received, as well as two petitions with a total of approximately 450 signatures. NPS staff also met with representatives of stakeholder groups from Marin County and interested agencies that requested briefings. In response to the comments received, the NPS and CALC contracted for two additional studies on public access options within the project area that evaluated potential impacts on resources and adjacent land uses, as well as technical feasibility and costs. As part of this effort, additional meetings were held with adjacent landowners and the general public in February-March, 2005. The Seashore's Notice of Availability for the DEIS/EIR was published in the Federal Register on November 3, 2006. The EPA's notification of filing of the DEIS/EIR was published in the Federal Register on December 15, 2006, formally initiating the 60-day public comment period. A notice that the DEIS/EIR had been also filed with the State Clearinghouse was published on December 18, 2006. The Seashore mailed over 450 letters regarding availability of the DEIS/EIR for public review on December 13, 2006 (this letter also announced a public meeting scheduled for January 25, 2007, at the Seashore Red Barn, and confirmed that the public comment period would end February 14, 2007). On December 14, 2006, a press release announcing the public meeting was distributed to the Point Reyes Light, Marin Independent Journal, and Press Democrat, as well as 28 other media outlets, including newspapers, radio stations, and television stations. Details about the public meeting were also posted on the Seashore's Web site. The Marin Independent Journal and Point Reyes Light published articles about release of the DEIS/EIR and the pending public meeting. Approximately 100 members of the public attended the January 25, 2007 meeting. The Point Reyes Light published an account of the meeting on February 1, 2007. Altogether approximately 180 interested individuals and organizations responded to release of the DEIS/EIR; approximately 170 were from private individuals. There were no form letters. More than 99 percent of the letters submitted were from residents of Marin County. Organizations providing comments included the Environmental Action Committee of Marin; Point Reyes Lodging Association; Marin County Bicycle Coalition/Community Pathways Committee/Access 4 Bikes; California Native Plant Society; Point Reyes Village Association; Sierra Club, Marin Chapter; and Tomales Bay Association. Ten responses were received from local, state, or federal agenciesthe California Coastal Commission; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board; the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary; the North Marin Water District; the Marin/Sonoma Mosquito and Vector Control District; the County of Marin Department of Public Works; the County of Marin Department of Parks and Open Space District; the State Department of Conservation; the State of California Department of Fish and Game; and the EPA. More than 90 percent of the oral and written comments received during the public meeting and throughout the comment period concerned the choice of Alternative C as the Preferred Alternative. A large number of comments also advocated modifications to either the existing Preferred Alternative or to Alternative D, with most of these proposed modifications focusing on changes to the public access components on the eastern and southern perimeters of the project area. On March 2, 2007, the EPA published its Lack of Objection (LO) findings regarding the DEIS/EIR, noting that the ``EPA supports the proposed project and believes it will significantly improve the hydrologic and ecological processes and functions in the Tomales Bay Watershed.'' All written comments received and a summary of commentary from the January 25, 2007, public meeting are available for inspection at the Seashore Administration Building, 1 Bear Valley Road, Point Reyes Station, CA. Substantive comments and responses are documented in the FEIS/EIR. Copies of the FEIS/EIR may be obtained from the Superintendent, Point Reyes National Seashore, Point Reyes, CA 94956, Attn: Giacomini Wetlands Restoration Project, or by e-mail request to: poreplanning@nps.gov (in the subject line, type: Giacomini Wetlands Restoration Project). The document will be sent directly to those who have requested it, and also will be posted on the Internet at the Seashore's Web site https://www.nps.gov/pore; and both the printed document and digital version on compact disk will be available at the park headquarters and local libraries. Decision: As a delegated EIS/EIR, the official responsible for the final decision is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region. A Record of Decision, fully documenting the entire conservation planning and environmental decision-making process, will be prepared not sooner than 30 days following publication in the Federal Register of the EPA's notice of filing and availability of the Final EIS/EIR. Subsequently and prior to implementation, notice of approval of the Record of Decision will likewise be published in the Federal Register, as well as announced via local and regional news media. Following approval of the Giacomini Wetlands Restoration Project, the official responsible for project implementation will be the Superintendent, Point Reyes National Seashore.
Notice of Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Special Resource Study (SRS) for Sites Related to the Civil War Battle of Franklin, Near Franklin, Tennessee
Pursuant to section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and National Park Service policy in Director's Order 2 (Park Planning) and Director's Order 12 (Conservation Planning, Environmental Impact Analysis, and Decision-making) the National Park Service (NPS) will prepare an EIS for the SRS for sites related to the Civil War Battle of Franklin (BoF) located in Franklin, Tennessee. The statement will assess potential environmental impacts associated with various types and levels of visitor use and resources management for sites related to the BoF. The authority for publishing this notice is contained in 40 CFR 1506.6 which prescribes the regulations for implementing the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act. The process by which the Secretary of the Interior will conduct SRSs is contained in 16 U.S.C. 1a-5. New areas are typically added to the National Park System by an Act of Congress. The National Park Service is often tasked by Congress to evaluate potential new areas for compliance with the established criteria for designation. The NPS documents its findings in a SRS Report. On December 1, 2005, Congress passed the Franklin National Battlefield Study Act (Pub. L. 109-120) directing the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a SRS for certain sites in Tennessee including the cities of Brentwood, Franklin, Triune, Thompson Station, and Spring Hill, Tennessee. The NPS is currently accepting comments from interested parties on issues, concerns, and suggestions pertinent to the BoF. Suggestions and ideas for managing the cultural and natural resources associated with the BoF are encouraged. Comments may be submitted in writing to the address listed at the end of this notice or through the NPS Planning, Environment, and Public Comment (PEPC) Web site at https:// parkplanning.nps.gov. The NPS will publish periodic newsletters on the PEPC Web site to present scoping issues and preliminary management concepts to the public as they are developed. Public meetings to present management concepts will be conducted in the local area. Specific locations, dates, and times will be announced in local media and on the PEPC Web site. If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments by any one of several methods. You may mail comments to: Tim Bemisderfer, Battle of Franklin SRS, NPS Southeast Regional Office, Planning and Compliance Division, 100 Alabama Street, 6th Floor 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. You may also comment via the Internet to https://parkplanning.nps.gov/sero. Please submit Internet comments as a plain text file, avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include your name and return address in your Internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have received your Internet message, contact us directly at 404-562-3124, extension 693. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire commentincluding your personal identifying informationmay 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. We will always make submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives of or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.
Notice of Intent (NOI) to Expand the Scope of the General Management Plan (GMP)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Being Prepared for Fort Pulaski National Monument
The National Park Service (NPS) is expanding the scope of the GMP/EIS being prepared for Fort Pulaski National Monument. As part of this planning effort, the NPS will include a wilderness study to determine if any portions of the park should be recommended for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System as defined in the Wilderness Act of 1964. The study will be included as part of the GMP/EIS currently in preparation. A NOI to prepare an EIS for the GMP was originally published in the Federal Register on February 24, 2005, (Volume 70, Number 36). That EIS now will be expanded to include an evaluation of the impacts associated with possible designation of wilderness at Fort Pulaski. This notice is being furnished as required by National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations 40 CFR 1501.7. To facilitate sound planning and analysis of environmental impact, the NPS is gathering information necessary for the preparation of the GMP, the wilderness study, and the associated EIS and is obtaining suggestions and information from other agencies and the public on the scope of issues to be addressed. Comments and participation in this scoping process are invited.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
