DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 249/Wednesday, December 28

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 249/Wednesday, December 28 95738 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Rm W–1623, Sacramento, CA 95825; Sec. 31, that portion lying northwesterly of email [email protected]. Persons who California State Highway 164. Bureau of Land Management use a telecommunications device for the Sec. 32, N1⁄2 and those portions of the 1 1 1 deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Relay W ⁄2SE ⁄4 and SW ⁄4 lying northwesterly [LLCA932000.17X.L13400000.DP0000. of California State Highway 164; Service (FRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to LXSSB0020000 CACA057064] Sec. 33, NW1⁄4NW1⁄4 and those portions of reach the BLM contact person. The the NE1⁄4 and W1⁄2NW1⁄4 lying Notice of Proposed Withdrawal; Service is available 24 hours a day, 7 northwesterly of California State California Desert Conservation Area days a week, to leave a message or Highway 164; and Notice of Intent To Prepare an question with the above individual. You Secs. 34 thru 35, those portions lying Environmental Impact Statement; will receive a reply during normal northwesterly of California State California business hours. Highway 164. T. 15.5 N., R. 15 E., SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Sec. 19, that portion lying northeasterly of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Interior. California State Highway 164; petitioned the Assistant Secretary of the Sec. 21, lots 1 thru 3 and that portion of ACTION: 1 1 Notice. Interior for Land and Minerals the NE ⁄4SE ⁄4 lying northerly of Management to withdraw 1,337,904 California State Highway 164; SUMMARY: This notice announces that million acres of California Desert Secs. 22 thru 24, those portions lying the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for northerly of California State Highway Land and Minerals Management National Conservation Lands from location and entry under the United 164. proposes to withdraw 1,337,904 acres of T. 16 N., R. 15 E., public lands located within designated States mining laws for a period of 20 Secs. 1 thru 3; California Desert National Conservation years, subject to valid existing rights. Sec. 4, that portion lying easterly of Lands from mining to protect nationally All of the lands (unless otherwise Ivanpah Special Recreation Management significant landscapes with outstanding subject to an existing withdrawal) will Area (SRMA 2); remain open to the public land laws, Sec. 7, that portion lying southeasterly of cultural, biological, and scientific Ivanpah Valley Extensive Recreation values. This notice temporarily leasing under the mineral and geothermal leasing laws, and disposal Management Area (ERMA 26) and segregates the lands from location and southwesterly of Ivanpah SRMA 2; entry under the United States mining under the mineral material sales laws. The lands are located in the California Secs. 9 thru 10, those portions lying laws for up to two years and provides easterly of Ivanpah SRMA 2; the public with an opportunity to Desert Conservation Area. Copies of the Secs. 11 thru 15; comment on the proposed withdrawal. maps entitled ‘‘DRECP-California Desert Sec. 17, that portion lying southerly of In addition, this notice initiates the National Conservation Lands Proposed Ivanpah SRMA 2; public scoping process for an Withdrawal’’ depicting the lands Sec. 18, that portion lying southeasterly of Ivanpah Valley ERMA 26 and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), proposed for withdrawal are posted on the BLM Web site at http:// southwesterly of Ivanpah SRMA 2; which will analyze and disclose impacts Secs. 19 thru 30; of the proposed withdrawal. www.blm.gov/california/DRECP.html and are also available from the Sec. 31, that portion lying northeasterly of DATES: Comments on the proposed following BLM offices: California State Highway 164; Sec. 32; withdrawal application and scoping • BLM California State Office, 2800 comments on issues to be analyzed in Sec. 33, N1⁄2NE1⁄4, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4, Cottage Way, Suite W–1623, 1 1 1 1 1 the EIS must be received by March 28, E ⁄2SW ⁄4NE ⁄4, NE ⁄4SE ⁄4, Sacramento, CA 95825; S1⁄2SE1⁄4,E1⁄2NW1⁄4SE1⁄4, S1⁄2SW1⁄4, 2017. Please clearly indicate whether • 1 1 1 1 1 BLM California Desert District W ⁄2NW ⁄4SW ⁄4, N ⁄2NW ⁄4, and comments are in regard to the 1 1 1 Office, 22835 Calle San Juan De Los W ⁄2SW ⁄4NW ⁄4; withdrawal application or scoping Lagos, Moreno Valley, CA 92553; Secs. 34 and 35; comments on the EIS. The date(s) and • BLM Barstow Field Office, 2601 Sec. 36, S1⁄2SE1⁄4. location(s) of meetings related to the Barstow Road, Barstow, CA 92311; T. 17 N., R. 15 E., proposed withdrawal and scoping • BLM El Centro Field Office, 1661 S. Sec. 21, that portion lying easterly of meetings for the EIS will be announced Ivanpah Valley ERMA 26; 4th Street, El Centro, CA 92243; Sec. 22; at least 30 days in advance of the • BLM Needles Field Office, 1303 S. meeting through local media, Secs. 26 thru 28; Highway 95, Needles, CA 92363; Sec. 29, that portion lying easterly of newspapers, the Federal Register, and • BLM Palm Springs South Coast Ivanpah SRMA 2; the BLM Web site at: http:// Field Office, 1201 Bird Center Drive, Secs. 32 and 33, those portions lying www.blm.gov/california/DRECP. In Palm Springs, CA 92262; and northeasterly of Ivanpah SRMA 2; order to be included in the EIS, all • BLM Ridgecrest Field Office, 300 S. Secs. 34 thru 36. comments must be received prior to the Richmond Road, Ridgecrest, CA 93555. T. 15.5 N., R. 14 E., close of the 90-day scoping period. The proposed withdrawal is divided Sec. 29, that portion of the S1⁄2 lying Additional opportunities for public into four areas and includes all of the westerly of Ivanpah Valley ERMA 26; Sec. 30, that portion of the S1⁄2 lying participation will be available following public lands identified below: publication of the draft EIS. northwesterly of Ivanpah Valley ERMA Amargosa Area 26; ADDRESSES: Written comments should Sec. 31, that portion lying westerly of be sent to the BLM-California State San Bernardino Meridian Ivanpah Valley ERMA 26; Director, 2800 Cottage Way, Rm W– T. 15.5 N., R. 16 E., T. 16 N., R. 14 E., 1623, Sacramento, CA 95825 or Sec. 19, that portion lying northwesterly of Sec. 24, that portion lying easterly of electronically to drecp_cdncl_ California State Highway 164. Ivanpah ACEC 105; [email protected]. T. 16 N., R. 16 E., Sec. 25; Secs. 6 thru 8; Sec. 26, that portion lying easterly of U.S. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Secs. 16 thru 22; Interstate Highway 15; Vicki Campbell, DRECP Program Sec. 26, that portion lying northwesterly of Sec. 35, that portion lying easterly of U.S. Manager, 916–978–4320; Bureau of California State Highway 164; Interstate Highway 15 and northerly of Land Management, 2800 Cottage Way, Secs. 27 thru 30; California State Highway 164. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:49 Dec 27, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\28DEN2.SGM 28DEN2 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES2 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 249 / Wednesday, December 28, 2016 / Notices 95739 T. 17 N., R. 14 E., Sec. 6, that portion lying easterly of BLM Secs. 19 thru 31; Sec. 1, that portion lying northwesterly of Kingston Range Wilderness Area; Sec. 32, those portions lying northerly, Ivanpah Area of Critical Environmental Sec. 8, those portions lying easterly of BLM westerly, and southerly of Mineral Concern (ACEC) 105; Kingston Range Wilderness Area and Survey No. 3991AB, approved July 15, Sec. 2, that portion lying northeasterly of westerly and southeasterly of BLM 1902; BLM Stateline Wilderness Area. Mesquite Wilderness Area; Sec. 33, those portions excluding Mineral T. 18 N., R. 14 E., Secs. 9 and 10, those portions lying Survey No. 3991AB, approved July 15, Sec. 21, that portion lying northeasterly of southeasterly of BLM Mesquite 1902; BLM Stateline Wilderness Area and Wilderness Area; Secs. 34 and 35. southeasterly of Mesquite Valley ERMA Sec. 14, that portion lying northwesterly of T. 17 N., R. 11 E., 30; Mojave National Preserve; Sec. 9, S1⁄2SE1⁄4 and SE1⁄4SW1⁄4; Sec. 22; Sec. 15, those portions lying northwesterly Sec. 10, that portion lying southerly of Secs. 26 and 27; of Mojave National Preserve; BLM Kingston Range Wilderness Area; Sec. 28, that portion lying easterly of BLM Sec. 17, those portions lying northeasterly Sec. 15, that portion lying northwesterly of Stateline Wilderness Area; and southeasterly of BLM Kingston BLM Kingston Range Wilderness Area; Secs. 33 thru 35, those portions lying Range Wilderness Area; Sec. 20, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4SE1⁄4; northeasterly of BLM Stateline Secs. 18 and 19, those portions lying Sec. 21; Wilderness Area; southeasterly of BLM Kingston Range Sec. 22, that portion lying southwesterly of Sec. 36. Wilderness Area; BLM Kingston Range Wilderness Area; T. 16 N., R. 13 E., Sec. 20; Sec. 23, those portions lying southeasterly Sec. 7, those portions lying southerly of Sec. 21, those portions lying northwesterly and southwesterly of Kingston Range Mojave National Preserve and excluding and westerly of Mojave National Wilderness Area; Mineral Survey No. 5372AB, approved Preserve; Sec. 24, that portion lying southeasterly of November 2, 1918; Sec. 28, that portion lying westerly of BLM Kingston Range Wilderness Area; Sec. 17, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4, lots 1 thru 7, those Mojave National Preserve; Secs. 25 and 26; portions of the SE1⁄4 and SW1⁄4 lying Secs. 29 thru 32; Sec. 27, those portions lying northerly, northwesterly of U.S. Interstate Highway Sec. 33, that portion lying westerly of southerly, and easterly of BLM Kingston 15; Mojave National Preserve. Range Wilderness Area; Sec.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Coachella Valley Conservation Commission
    COACHELLA VALLEY CONSERVATION COMMISSION Thursday, May 10, 2012 11:00 a.m. CVAG Offices 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 119 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-1127 Teleconferencing will be available at: Imperial Irrigation District 1653 W. Main Street El Centro CA 92243 THIS MEETING IS HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE. ACTION MAY RESULT ON ANY ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA. 1. CALL TO ORDER - Chair Richard W. Kite, Councilmember, City of Rancho Mirage 2. ROLL CALL A. Member Roster P. 4 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for any person wishing to address the Coachella Valley Conservation Commission to do so. 5. COMMITTEE MEMBER/DIRECTOR COMMENTS 6. CONSENT CALENDAR` A. Approve Minutes of the April 12, 2012 Coachella Valley Conservation P. 5 Commission B. Receive and File 1. Quarterly Unaudited Financial Statements as at March 31, 2012 P. 8 2. Investment Report as at March 31, 2012 P. 9 3. Participating Special Entity Status for Southern California Edison Pole P. 10 Replacement Project 4. Attendance Roster P. 11 7. DISCUSSION / ACTION (Map 1 – Regional Context for Land Acquisitions is referenced in staff reports 7A through 7E. Map 1 is found only in Item 7A) A. Acquisition of approximately 2.74 acres from private landowners for a total P. 12 purchase price of $38,000 plus closing costs (continued from April 12 meeting) - Kevin McKernan, Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution 12-004 authorizing acquisition of 2.74 acres (2 parcels) within the CVMSHCP Conservation Areas for a total purchase price of $38,000 and an additional amount not expected to exceed $1,000 for closing costs, and authorize the Executive Director or Chair to sign documents and take such actions as necessary to effect the conveyance.
    [Show full text]
  • Trail Protecti N
    Trail Protecti n By Brendan Taylor, PCTA Associate Regional Representative n Labor Day, I stood on the PCT in the Kiavah Wilderness of Southern California, staring at an enormous black smoke cloud billowing up from a canyon south of me. I had a sinking feeling that some part of the Trail was burning. When I got back into cell phone range later that day, my phone bombarded me with messages saying that Oak Creek Canyon and the PCT were on fire. own, sometimes raging despite tireless efforts of firefighters. If fires go unchecked, the impact to the PCT can be significant. Almost The fire, started by a plane crash in a side canyon, spread quickly, certainly, the agency that manages the land will close the trail to destroying many private residences and raging over the trail itself, users because of the many hazards present in a burn area, especially eventually burning 30,000 acres outside Tehachapi. Firefighters even- burned trees that could come down with the slightest wind gust. tually brought the Canyon Fire under control, but a 30-mile section Eventually, all of those trees will come down, many of them onto of the PCT around Oak Creek Canyon is now closed. This closure is the trail. The resulting log piles and the rapid regrowth of sun-loving just one of five caused by fire on the PCT at the time of this writing brush will make the PCT near impassable until a crew clears the in late September. In many ways, fire is the most challenging trail trail – a rather onerous task in remote wilderness settings.
    [Show full text]
  • Pahrump-Tecopa.Pdf
    Old Spanish National Historic Trail Pahrump, Nevada and Tecopa, California Public Scoping Meetings April 5-6, 2006 Amargosa Valley Desert National Wildlife Refuge 9 2 Y W Nellis Air Force Base H E T A Indian Springs T S U Moapa River Indian Reservation S HW Y 95 Nellis Air Force Base Desert National Wildlife Refuge 3 7 3 Y 56 Dry Lake STA Death Valley W TE 1 HWY H Y 16 W 9 S E T H A T TE T A A E T S ST H S T U W A S Y T H 4 Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge E W 0 Y H 9 W 3 Y 1 6 Funeral Mountains Wilderness STATE HWY 190 157 WY E H TAT STATE HWY 190 S 6 1 Argus Range Wilderness Y 04 W 6 Toiyabe National Forest Y H HW E E T AT A ST T U S S H W Y 9 5 Pahrump B 72 U N. Las Vegas 3 S 167 Y 1 STATE HWY 147 STATE HWY HW 0 E 6 T Y TA S W Surprise Canyon Wilderness H E Las Vegas Resting Spring Range Wilderness T STATE HWY 159 A T Death Valley National Park S S Winchester T A T S E TA T H E W H STATE HWY 593 W 3 Paradise Y E. Las Vegas S 5 Y T 1 1 1 5 A 9 4 7 T Y 6 E Y W 8 H HW 4 S W Y 0 STATE HWY 152 U 6 H 1 8 60 N Y 7 E 1 T W e A Y H T v Blue Diamond W S Argus Range Wilderness C E H T a A Henderson E 46 a d T HWY 1 T TE S STA A l a U T i f S US HWY 93 S Nopah Range Wilderness o H Y 466 W US HW r Arden Y n I 515 93 ia Shoshone Boulder City Mount Wilson Wilderness Sloan Manly Peak Wilderness Ibex Wilderness South Nopah Range Wilderness Pahrump Valley Wilderness I 15 Tecopa 5 9 S T Y AT E Goodsprings W S U L H T I A S N TE E S HW H R U Y W a D 165 a Y ST 9 AT 3 n E H d WY 16 a 1 Jean o z v Trona i e r N North Mesquite Mountains Wilderness A
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Small Vessel General Permit
    ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PUBLIC NOTICE The United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois has requested a determination from the Illinois Department of Natural Resources if their Vessel General Permit (VGP) and Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) are consistent with the enforceable policies of the Illinois Coastal Management Program (ICMP). VGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non-recreational vessels greater than or equal to 79 ft. in length. sVGP regulates discharges incidental to the normal operation of commercial vessels and non- recreational vessels less than 79 ft. in length. VGP and sVGP can be viewed in their entirety at the ICMP web site http://www.dnr.illinois.gov/cmp/Pages/CMPFederalConsistencyRegister.aspx Inquiries concerning this request may be directed to Jim Casey of the Department’s Chicago Office at (312) 793-5947 or [email protected]. You are invited to send written comments regarding this consistency request to the Michael A. Bilandic Building, 160 N. LaSalle Street, Suite S-703, Chicago, Illinois 60601. All comments claiming the proposed actions would not meet federal consistency must cite the state law or laws and how they would be violated. All comments must be received by July 19, 2012. Proposed Small Vessel General Permit (sVGP) United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) SMALL VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS LESS THAN 79 FEET (sVGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act, as amended (33 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Ridgecrest BUREAU of LAND MANAGEMENT
    BLM SPECIAL EDITION 1998 EXAMPLES OF AGENCY SIGNS SURFACE MANAGEMENT STATUS DESERT ACCESS GUIDE Ridgecrest BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT USDA FOREST SERVICE l:100,0()0-Scale topographic map showing: Highways, roads and other manmade structures Water features • Contours and elevations in meters Recreation sites • Coverage of former desert access guide #4 Ridgecrest NATIONAL PARK SERVICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS Edited and published by the Bureau of Land Management National Applied Resource Sciences Center, Denver, Colorado in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management California State Office. Planimetry partially revised by BLM from various source material. Revised information not field . he. i-rd Base map prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey. Compiled from USGS 1:24,000 and l:62,5O0-scale topographic maps dated 1949-1973, and from advance materials. Partially revised from aerial photographs taken 1973-1989 and other source data. Revised information not CALIFORNIA STATE field checked. Map edited 1993. VEHICULAR RECREATION AREA Help protect your public lands by observing posted Projection and 10,000-meter grid, zone 11: Universal OHV designations. Watch for OHV signs and read hari'.verse Mercator. 25,000-foot grid licks based on them carefully. California coordinate system, zone 4 and 5. 1927 North American Datum. For more information contact the HIM, USDA Forest Service, National Park Service, California State Park, or California State Motorized Vechicle Recreation Area Land lines are omitted in areas of extensive tract surveys. Office (see back panel for address and phone There may be private inholdings within the boundaries of numbers).
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Exposures
    Searching for the Pliocene: Southern Exposures Robert E. Reynolds, editor California State University Desert Studies Center The 2012 Desert Research Symposium April 2012 Table of contents Searching for the Pliocene: Field trip guide to the southern exposures Field trip day 1 ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 5 Robert E. Reynolds, editor Field trip day 2 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 19 George T. Jefferson, David Lynch, L. K. Murray, and R. E. Reynolds Basin thickness variations at the junction of the Eastern California Shear Zone and the San Bernardino Mountains, California: how thick could the Pliocene section be? ��������������������������������������������������������������� 31 Victoria Langenheim, Tammy L. Surko, Phillip A. Armstrong, Jonathan C. Matti The morphology and anatomy of a Miocene long-runout landslide, Old Dad Mountain, California: implications for rock avalanche mechanics �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 38 Kim M. Bishop The discovery of the California Blue Mine ��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 44 Rick Kennedy Geomorphic evolution of the Morongo Valley, California ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 45 Frank Jordan, Jr. New records
    [Show full text]
  • Volunteers Crucial to BLM Wilderness Programs
    BY M A R T Y D I C K E S THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT: VOLUNTEERS Volunteers Crucial to BLM Wilderness Programs n the last two years, volunteers have helped the Bureau How volunteers contribute of Land Management’s (BLM) Ridgecrest Field Office Individual volunteers have “adopted” special places, trails, or in thirteen wilderness or wilderness study are a s . wilderness areas. They regularly visit, monitor, inventory, file Without volunteers, the Field Office would not have a reports, and perform other work in these areas. Volunteers have functioningI wilderness program. In this time of budget shortfalls, monitored and performed work in the Great Falls Basin and wilderness programs are critically understaffed. Most California White Mountain Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs), the El Paso, D e s e rt District (CDD) offices have only one staff person Sylvania, Piper, and Inyo Mountains Wildernesses, and the working fulltime in wilderness, despite the fact that there are Malpais Mesa, Darwin Falls, Coso Range, Bright Star, Sacatar more than 3.6 million acres of wilderness in the CDD. Trail, Surprise Canyon, and Manly Peak Wildernesses. Like most wilderness coordinators, I have a hard time getting Individuals who volunteer come to the office, pick up detailed out from behind my desk and on-the-ground. I must respond to boundary maps, carsonite signs and pounders, wood posts, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements of shovels, and stickers, and go to work, often camping out all programs with projects in wilderness, as well as pushing my overnight and working an area for 2-3 days.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequoia Forestkeeper and Sierra Club, Western Watershed, and Basin & Range Watch Submitted These Comments Concerning
    René Voss – Attorney Natural Resources Law PROTECTING 15 Alderney Road ATURAL San Anselmo, CA 94960 N RESOURCES [email protected] Tel: 415-446-9027 _____________________________________________________________________________ January 8, 2021 Submitted via FERC web portal: https://ferconline.ferc.gov/ Copy sent via U.S. Postal Service to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426 Re: Docket No. 15035 – Premium Energy Holdings’ Preliminary Permit Application for the Isabella Pumped Storage Project, FERC [Project No. 15035–000], printed in the Federal Register /Vol. 85, No. 221 /Monday, November 16, 2020 Dear Ms. Bose: The undersigned conservation organizations are submitting these comments concerning the Isabella Pumped Storage Project, FERC Project No. P-15035 (Isabella Project or proposed project). See also https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/16/2020-25208/premium- energy-holdings-llc-notice-of-preliminary-permit-application-accepted-for-filing-and. We strongly oppose the issuance of this preliminary permit. We have a number of concerns about the application by Premium Energy Holdings, LLC, particularly with regard to the potential impact of activities that could be granted under the preliminary permit on sensitive federal lands, which are eligible for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System, and which are currently classified as Inventoried Roadless Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, and eligible Wild and Scenic Rivers. The proposed project would be located on public lands with highly sensitive resources managed by the U.S. Forest Service (Sequoia National Forest) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), state lands managed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, as well as lands owned by Non-Governmental Organizations and other private lands.
    [Show full text]
  • August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest
    August 25, 2016 Forest Planner, Forest Plan Revision USDA Forest Service, Region 5 Sent via: [email protected] Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans To the Forest Plan Revision Team: These comments on the Draft Forest Plans and Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Revision of the Inyo, Sequoia, and Sierra National Forests Land Management Plans are submitted on behalf of the organizations noted below. Collectively, we have been engaged in the forest plan revision process for these three national forests since initiated in 2012. Many of our organizations also have a long history of engagement in forest planning beginning with the first plans adopted in the late 1980s to early 1990s for national forests in the Sierra Nevada. We have embraced the new Planning Rule and taken seriously its invitation to provide feedback early in the process and throughout the development of the revised plans. We remain committed to working with your agency to develop revised forest plans that protect sensitive resources, provide for ecological integrity, and provide high quality recreational experiences. Our detailed review of the draft plans and DEIS indicate that there are significant gaps in assessment, development of plan components and evaluation of environmental consequences that preclude a meaningful analysis of the effects of the draft plans and alternatives on the environment. We ask that you revise the draft plans and revise or supplement the DEIS and circulate these documents for a 90-day comment period. Please contact Susan Britting (530-295-8210; [email protected]) if you have questions about these comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Wilderness Recommendations
    U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region June 2016 Wilderness Recommendations Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Forest Plans for the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests As part of revising the Inyo, Sequoia and Sierra National Forests land management plans (forest plans), the Forest Service is identifying and evaluating lands that may be suitable for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. This is a requirement of the 2012 Planning Rule (36 CFR 219.7(c)(2)(v)). We are not designating any wilderness areas through this process; only Congress can take that action. The wilderness recommendation process has three steps, inventory, evaluation and analysis. This process is documented in Appendix B in the draft environmental impact statement (EIS) for these forest plan revisions. We are following the 2012 Planning Rule Directives, Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 1909.12 Chapter 70, which uses criteria based on the Wilderness Act of 1964. Appendix B describes the outcome of the inventory and evaluation, the areas included in one or more alternative in the draft EIS, and rationale for those areas that were not selected for analysis in the draft EIS. Based on the analysis in the environmental impact statement and public input received, the Forest Supervisor for each of the three national forests will make a decision on specific areas to recommend for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. The decision will be included in the Record of Decision for the plan as a preliminary administrative recommendation. Forest plan components will provide direction for managing areas recommended for wilderness designation. Wilderness Recommendation Process There are four steps in the wilderness recommendation process: inventory, evaluation, analysis and recommendation.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]