DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Land Statistics 2014

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Land Statistics 2014 PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2014 Volume 199 BLM/OC/ST-15/005+1165 P-108-4 May 2015 WELCOME TO PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2014 Welcome to the 2014 edition of Public Land Statistics (PLS), published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). As in past PLS publications, this year’s cover is designed to convey the scope of the BLM’s complex and multifaceted mission using visual imagery. The 80-plus tables inside tell the story of the BLM’s mission, programs, and accomplishments using numerical data and detailed footnotes. Many of the minor acreage changes from one year to the next occur because: 1. Inholdings have been acquired, or some other land exchange has taken place during the year. 2. Better GIS mapping of land boundaries has enabled us to recalculate the total BLM acres within the unit. Note that data presented in the 2014 Public Land Statistics tables may not exactly match data in other BLM publications covering Fiscal Year 2014 operations and accomplishments. Such discrepancies occur because the databases that provide table data are not static; they are constantly being updated to provide the latest information, sometimes many months after the end of the fiscal year. We have presented the most current data available in this edition of Public Land Statistics. We remain committed to publishing a Public Land Statistics report each year that is timely, complete, and as helpful as possible to our readers. Public Land Statistics is available on the Internet. Please visit our national homepage at: http://www.blm.gov/public_land_statistics/index.htm. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table No. Page PART 1 LAND RESOURCES AND INFORMATION ................................................................................. 1 1-1 Acquisition of the Public Domain, 1781–1867 .............................................................................. 3 --- Acquisitions (Map) ......................................................................................................................... 4 1-2 Disposition of the Public Domain, 1781–2014 .............................................................................. 5 1-3 Mineral and Surface Acres Administered by the Bureau of Land Management............................ 7 --- Public Lands, On-Shore Federal and Indian Minerals in Lands of the U.S. Responsibilities of Bureau of Land Management—Lower 48 States (Map) ...................... 9 --- Public Lands, On-Shore Federal and Indian Minerals in Lands of the U.S. Responsibilities of Bureau of Land Management—Alaska (Map) ................................... 11 1-4 Public Lands Under Jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management ........................................ 13 1-5 Area of Oregon and California (O&C) Revested Lands .............................................................. 16 --- Revested Lands of the Oregon and California Railroad and the Coos Bay Wagon Road (Map) ................................................................................... 18 1-6 Withdrawals, Revocations, Modifications, Extensions, and Expirations ..................................... 19 --- Principal Meridians and Base Lines Governing the United States Public Land Surveys (Map) ....................................................................... 22 1-7 Cadastral Survey Actions Completed .......................................................................................... 23 --- Cadastral Survey Costs and Benefits to the BLM for 2014: Field Work Performed during the Fiscal year (Bar Graph) ........................................................ 37 --- 2014 Cadastral Survey Field Accomplishments: Percentage of Work Performed by Agency (Pie Chart) ..................................................................................... 39 --- 2014 Cadastral Survey Office Accomplishments: Percentage of Work Performed by Agency (Pie Chart) ..................................................................................... 41 1-8 Obligations of Appropriations Received ...................................................................................... 43 PART 2 HEALTHY AND PRODUCTIVE LANDS .............................................................................. 45 2-1 Percentage of Rangeland Acreage by Ecological Status by State ................................................ 47 2-2 Condition of Riparian-Wetland Areas .......................................................................................... 48 2-3 Resource Conservation and Improvement Accomplishments ..................................................... 51 2-4 Forest Development Accomplishments in Acres ......................................................................... 52 2-5 Types of Wildlife Habitat on Public Lands in the Conterminous 48 States ................................. 54 2-6 Types of Wildlife Habitat on Public Lands in Alaska .................................................................. 56 2-7 Fish, Wildlife, and Plant Conservation Activities Completed ..................................................... 57 2-8 Emergency Fire Stabilization and Rehabilitation Projects ........................................................... 62 PART 3 COMMERCIAL USES AND REVENUES GENERATED .................................................. 63 3-1 Patents Issued ............................................................................................................................... 65 3-2 Patents Issued with Minerals Reserved to the United States ........................................................ 71 3-3 Rights-of-Way Workload ............................................................................................................ 74 3-4 Number of Rights-of-Way (Including Solar and Wind) and Rental Receipts .............................. 75 3-5 Nonspecific Land Use Authorizations ......................................................................................... 76 3-6 Miscellaneous Land Use Authorizations ...................................................................................... 79 3-7a Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District (Section 3) Lands (FY 2013) .......................... 83 3-7b Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing Lease (Section 15) Lands (FY 2013) .......................... 84 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Table No. Page 3-7c Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District Lands and Grazing Lease Lands (FY 2013) ....................................................................................... 85 3-8a Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District (Section 3) Lands (FY 2014) .......................... 86 3-8b Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing Lease (Section 15) Lands (FY 2014) .......................... 87 3-8c Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District Lands and Grazing Lease Lands (FY 2014) ....................................................................................... 88 3-9a Grazing Permits in Force on Grazing District (Section 3) Lands as of October 29, 2014 ........... 89 3-9b Grazing Leases in Force on Grazing Lease (Section 15) Lands as of October 29, 2014 ............. 90 3-9c Grazing Permits and Leases in Force as of October 29, 2014 ...................................................... 91 3-10a Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District Lands and Grazing Lease Lands for Billing Year 2012 (March 1, 2012–February 28, 2013) ................................................................................. 92 3-10b Summary of Authorized Use of Grazing District Lands and Grazing Lease Lands for Billing Year 2013 (March 1, 2013–February 28, 2014) ................................................................................. 93 3-11 Timber, Wood Products, and Non-Wood Product Sales .............................................................. 94 3-12 Forest Products Offered by State ................................................................................................. 96 3-13 Competitive Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Leasing ........................................................................... 98 3-14 Noncompetitive Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Leasing ................................................................... 106 3-15 Other Oil and Gas Leasing Actions ............................................................................................ 113 3-16 New Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Activities on Federal Lands ..................................................... 117 3-17 Continuing Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Activities on Federal Lands as of September 30, 2014 ................................................................................................ 119 3-18 Federal Coal Leases, Licenses, Preference Right Lease Applications, and Logical Mining Units ................................................................................................ 122 3-19 Other Solid Mineral Leases, Licenses, Permits, and Preference Right Lease Applications ...... 126 3-20 Disposition of Mineral Materials ............................................................................................... 132 3-21 Mineral Patents Issued ............................................................................................................... 139 3-22 Adjudication of Mining Claims, Public Law 94-579, from October 21, 1976, through Fiscal Year 2014 ............................................................................................... 140 3-23 Notices and Plans of Mining Operations Reviewed by the Bureau of Land Management ........ 142 3-24 Helium Operations and Revenues
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Study of Uranium Favorability of Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks, Basin
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY A Study of Uranium Favorability of Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks Basin and Range Province, Arizona Part I General Geology and Chronology of Pre-late Miocene Cenozoic Sedimentary Rocks By Robert Scarborough and Jan Carol Wilt Open File Report 79-1429 1979 This report was funded by U.S. Geological Survey Grant No. 14-08-0001528. It;has not been edited for conformity with U.S. Geological Survey standards or with accepted U.S. Geological Survey stratigraphic nomenclature. FOREWORD This report by Robert Scarborough and Jan Carol Wilt summarizes the results of a study made for the U.S. Geological Survey jointly by the Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology and the Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry, College of Earth Sciences, University of Arizona, under Grant No. 14-08-0001528. Age dating by the K/Ar method was cost-shared with. NSF Grant No. EAR78-11535 which supports volcanic rock studies by the Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry. It is considered that this report adequately fulfills the agreement objectives. Principal Investigator: H. Wesley Peirce, Principal Geologist Geological Survey Branch Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology University of Arizona, Tucson Co-Principal Investigator: Paul E. Damon, Chief Scientist Laboratory of Isotope Geochemistry Department of Geosciences College of Earth Sciences University of Arizona, Tucson CONTENTS Page Abstract ,....,,...,...,........« « 1 Introduction ...,.,..*....««..« «« 3 General statement ........ , ».....,....». 3 Purpose and scope .«..,,.....,.......... 3 Acknowledgments ..................... * . 4 Location and physiographic setting .............. 4 Approach ........................... 5 General Cenozoic geology of Basin and Range Province sediments . General statement ...................... 7 Group I localities with radioactive anomalies ........ 9 Mineta Formation ..................... 9 Cardinal Avenue sediments ................
    [Show full text]
  • BLM Public Land Statistics 2007
    Click Here for Table of Contents PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2007 Volume 192 BLM/OC/ST-08/001+1165 May 2008 WELCOME TO PUBLIC LAND STATISTICS 2007 Welcome to the 2007 edition of Public Land Statistics, published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). As in years past, the cover of this year’s publication is designed to convey the scope of the Bureau’s complex and multifaceted mission using visual imagery. The 80-plus tables inside the document tell the story of the BLM’s mission, programs, and accomplishments using numerical data and detailed footnotes. Many of the minor acreage changes from 1 year to the next occur because: 1. Inholdings have been acquired or some other land exchange has taken place during the year. 2. Better GIS mapping of land boundaries has enabled us to recalculate the total BLM acres within the unit. Public Land Statistics is available on the Internet. Please visit our national homepage at: http://www.blm.gov/public_land_statistics/index.htm . Note that the data presented in the 2007 Public Land Statistics tables may not exactly match the data in other BLM publications covering Fiscal Year 2007 operations and accomplishments. This occurs because the databases that provide table data are not static; they are constantly being updated to provide the latest information, sometimes many months after the end of the fiscal year. We have presented the most current data available in this edition of Public Land Statistics. We remain committed to publishing a Public Land Statistics report each year that is timely, complete, and helpful as possible to our readers.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn
    Final Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 6 October 2010 This page left blank intentionally 6 October 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION............................................ 1 1.1 Proposed Action.............................................................. 2 1.2 Project Need................................................................. 6 1.3 Background Information on Sonoran Pronghorn . 9 1.3.1 Taxonomy.............................................................. 9 1.3.2 Historic Distribution and Abundance......................................... 9 1.3.3 Current Distribution and Abundance........................................ 10 1.3.4 Life History............................................................ 12 1.3.5 Habitat................................................................ 13 1.3.6 Food and Water......................................................... 18 1.3.7 Home Range, Movement, and Habitat Area Requirements . 18 1.4 Project Purpose ............................................................. 19 1.5 Decision to be Made.......................................................... 19 1.6 Compliance with Laws, Regulations, and Plans . 19 1.7 Permitting Requirements and Authorizations Needed . 21 1.8 Scoping Summary............................................................ 21 1.8.1 Internal Agency Scoping.................................................. 21 1.8.2 Public Scoping ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona's Wildlife Linkages Assessment
    ARIZONAARIZONA’’SS WILDLIFEWILDLIFE LINKAGESLINKAGES ASSESSMENTASSESSMENT Workgroup Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Arizona’s Wildlife Linkages Assessment Prepared by: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Siobhan E. Nordhaugen, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Evelyn Erlandsen, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Habitat Branch Paul Beier, Northern Arizona University, School of Forestry Bruce D. Eilerts, Arizona Department of Transportation, Natural Resources Management Group Ray Schweinsburg, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Terry Brennan, USDA Forest Service, Tonto National Forest Ted Cordery, Bureau of Land Management Norris Dodd, Arizona Game and Fish Department, Research Branch Melissa Maiefski, Arizona Department of Transportation, Environmental Planning Group Janice Przybyl, The Sky Island Alliance Steve Thomas, Federal Highway Administration Kim Vacariu, The Wildlands Project Stuart Wells, US Fish and Wildlife Service 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT First Printing Date: December, 2006 Copyright © 2006 The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorized without prior written consent from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written consent of the copyright holder. Additional copies may be obtained by submitting a request to: The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup E-mail: [email protected] 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT The Arizona Wildlife Linkages Workgroup Mission Statement “To identify and promote wildlife habitat connectivity using a collaborative, science based effort to provide safe passage for people and wildlife” 2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT Primary Contacts: Bruce D.
    [Show full text]
  • Section Four—Open Space Element
    Open Space Element Section Four—Open Space Element 4.1 Introduction There are many ways that open space can be defined, but the following definition of open space is the one used in the Yuma County 2020 Comprehensive Plan. Open space is defined as any publicly owned and publicly accessible space or area characterized by great natural scenic beauty or whose existing openness, natural condition or present state of use, if retained, would maintain or enhance the conservation of natural or scenic resources. Arizona Revised Statutes §11-821(D)(1) requires that an open space element contained in a comprehensive plan have the following components: A comprehensive inventory of open space areas, recreational resources and designation of access points to open space areas and resources; an analysis of forecasted needs, policies for managing and protecting open space areas and re- sources and implementation strategies to acquire open space areas and further establish recrea- tional resources; and policies and implementation strategies designed to promote a regional sys- tem of integrated open space and recreational resources and a consideration of any existing re- gional open space plan. A rich variety of open spaces exists within Yuma County. Only a very small portion of the County is urbanized and over 91% of the unincorporated Yuma County is publicly owned. Much of the federally owned land and a small portion of state owned land in Yuma County is specifically designated and managed as open space areas. A comprehensive inventory of these designated open space areas as required under ARS §11-821(D)(1)(a) is contained in this ele- ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Canyon Council Oa Where to Go Camping Guide
    GRAND CANYON COUNCIL OA WHERE TO GO CAMPING GUIDE GRAND CANYON COUNCIL, BSA OA WHERE TO GO CAMPING GUIDE Table of Contents Introduction to The Order of the Arrow ....................................................................... 1 Wipala Wiki, The Man .................................................................................................. 1 General Information ...................................................................................................... 3 Desert Survival Safety Tips ........................................................................................... 4 Further Information ....................................................................................................... 4 Contact Agencies and Organizations ............................................................................. 5 National Forests ............................................................................................................. 5 U. S. Department Of The Interior - Bureau Of Land Management ................................ 7 Maricopa County Parks And Recreation System: .......................................................... 8 Arizona State Parks: .................................................................................................... 10 National Parks & National Monuments: ...................................................................... 11 Tribal Jurisdictions: ..................................................................................................... 13 On the Road: National
    [Show full text]
  • EIS-0386-DEIS-02-2007.Pdf
    Draft WWEC PEIS September 2007 DOCUMENT CONTENTS VOLUME I Executive Summary Chapter 1: Why Are Federal Agencies Proposing to Designate Energy Corridors in the West? Chapter 2: What Are the Alternatives Evaluated in This PEIS? Chapter 3: What Are the Potential Environmental Consequences of Corridor Designation and Land Use Plan Amendment? Chapter 4: How Are Cumulative Impacts Evaluated? Chapter 5: What Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Might Be Caused by Corridor Designation and Land Use Plan Amendment? Chapter 6: The Relationship between Local Short-Term Uses of the Environment and Long-Term Productivity Chapter 7: What Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Would Be Involved with Implementation of the Alternatives? Chapter 8: List of Preparers Chapter 9: References Chapter 10: Glossary VOLUME II Appendix A: Proposed Land Use Plan Amendments Appendix B: Summary of Public Scoping Comments for the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Designation of Energy Corridors on Federal Land in the 11 Western States (DOE/FS-0386) Appendix C: Tribal Consultation Appendix D: Federal and State Regulatory Requirements Potentially Applicable When Designating Energy Corridors Appendix E: Energy Transport Technologies and Hypothetical Energy Transport Projects Appendix F: Section 368 Corridor Parameters Appendix G: Sensitive Resource Areas That Would Be Intersected by Proposed West-wide Energy Corridors Appendix H: Geographic Information System Data Appendix I: Summary of WWEC PEIS Webcasts for Corridor Review and Revision, 6/19/06 to 4/24/07
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn
    Draft Environmental Assessment for Reestablishment of Sonoran Pronghorn U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service Region 2 1 October 2009 This page left blank intentionally 1 October 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION............................................ 1 1.1 Proposed Action.............................................................. 2 1.2 Project Need................................................................. 6 1.3 Background Information on Sonoran Pronghorn . 9 1.3.1 Taxonomy.............................................................. 9 1.3.2 Historic Distribution and Abundance......................................... 9 1.3.3 Current Distribution and Abundance........................................ 10 1.3.4 Life History............................................................ 12 1.3.5 Habitat................................................................ 13 1.3.6 Food and Water......................................................... 18 1.3.7 Home Range, Movement, and Habitat Area Requirements . 18 1.4 Project Purpose ............................................................. 19 1.5 Decision to be Made.......................................................... 19 1.6 Compliance with Laws, Regulations, and Plans . 19 1.7 Permitting Requirements and Authorizations Needed . 21 1.8 Scoping Summary............................................................ 21 1.8.1 Internal Agency Scoping.................................................. 21 1.8.2 Public Scoping ........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • K-Ar Geochronology and Geologic History of Southwestern Arizona and Adjacent Areas
    Arizona Geological Society Digest, Volume XII, 1980 201 K-Ar Geochronology and Geologic History of Southwestern Arizona and Adjacent Areas by 2 3 M. Shafiqullah , P.E. Damonl , D.J. Lynch l, S.J. Reynolds , WA. Rehrig , 4 and R.N. Raymond A bstract This paper presents K-Ar ages of 174 samples from 154 localities in southwestern Ari- zona and adjacent areas with a summary of the geologic history. Ages are given for many rock units that had been "dated" previously only by lithologic correlations. These ages establish the timing of the magmatic and tectonic events that created and deformed the rocks. We interpret the older Precambrian history of Arizona as the result of a long-enduring and evolving convergent continental margin with accretion to the southeast at the rate of 2 km/m.y. This process was terminated 1.4 b.y. ago by the intrusion of vast batholiths ex- tending in a northeasterly direction far beyond Arizona. Younger Precambrian rocks ac- cumulated in an epicontinental sea along the trend of the Cordilleran geosyncline. These rocks were intruded by extensive diabase sills that are best preserved in the central moun- tain region. There is no further record of Precambrian magmatism or sedimentation after intrusion of the diabase sills. Some Precambrian K-Ar dates have been reset by the thermal disturbance that accompanied these intrusions. K-Ar ages that fall within the Paleozoic are reset ages and there is no evidence for any Paleozoic magmatism in the region. K-Ar ages of most of the pre-Laramide Mesozoic igneous rocks in the region have been reset by Laramide magmatism but evidence has been found for Early to Late Jurassic magmatism.
    [Show full text]
  • Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES
    2006 ARIZONA’S WILDLIFE LINKAGES ASSESSMENT 41 Section VII Potential Linkage Zones SECTION VII POTENTIAL LINKAGE ZONES Linkage 1 Linkage 2 Beaver Dam Slope – Virgin Slope Beaver Dam – Virgin Mountains Mohave Desert Ecoregion Mohave Desert Ecoregion County: Mohave (Linkage 1: Identified Species continued) County: Mohave Kit Fox Vulpes macrotis ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff and Kingman Mohave Desert Tortoise Gopherus agassizii ADOT Engineering District: Flagstaff ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia and Kingman Mountain Lion Felis concolor ADOT Maintenance: Fredonia ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Mule Deer Odocoileus hemionus ADOT Natural Resources Management Section: Flagstaff Speckled Dace Rhinichthys osculus Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum AGFD: Region II AGFD: Region II Virgin Chub Gila seminuda Virgin Spinedace Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis BLM: Arizona Strip District Woundfin Plagopterus argentissimus BLM: Arizona Strip District Congressional District: 2 Threats: Congressional District: 2 Highway (I 15) Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments Urbanization Council of Government: Western Arizona Council of Governments FHWA Engineering: A2 and A4 Hydrology: FHWA Engineering: A2 Big Bend Wash Legislative District: 3 Coon Creek Legislative District: 3 Virgin River Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Biotic Communities (Vegetation Types): Mohave Desertscrub 100% Mohave Desertscrub 100% Land Ownership: Land Ownership: Bureau of Land Management 59% Bureau of Land Management 93% Private 27% Private
    [Show full text]
  • YPG Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) 2017
    -+ INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN U.S. ARMY YUMA PROVING GROUND YUMA AND LA PAZ COUNTIES, ARIZONA Update for: Fiscal Years 2017-2022 September 2017 Prepared by U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Environmental Sciences Division 301 C Street Yuma Proving Ground Yuma, Arizona Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. INTEGRATED NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN U.S. Army Garrison Yuma Proving Ground Update for: FY 2017–2022 Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Digitally signed by GLOVER.JOHN.A.1284210391 Digitally signed by GLOVER.JOHN.A.1 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, DRISCOLL.PATRICK. DRISCOLL.PATRICK.JOSEPH.1231990557 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, ou=USA, cn=GLOVER.JOHN.A.1284210391 cn=DRISCOLL.PATRICK.JOSEPH.1231990557 284210391 Date: 2017.08.09 14:50:51 -07'00' JOSEPH.1231990557 Date: 2017.08.15 15:09:26 -07'00' JOHN GLOVER PATRICK J. DRIS&OLL Acting Chief, Environmental Director, Public Works Sciences Division Reviewed by: Reviewed by: Digitally signed by Digitally signed by GONZALES.FRANCISCO.E.JR.1155703560 GONZALES.FRANCIS DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, ou=USA, HALLAHAN.ROBER HALLAHAN.ROBERT.J.1229262730 cn=GONZALES.FRANCISCO.E.JR.1155703560 DN: c=US, o=U.S. Government, ou=DoD, ou=PKI, CO.E.JR.1155703560 Date: 2017.08.17 11:34:42 -07'00' ou=USA, cn=HALLAHAN.ROBERT.J.1229262730 T.J.1229262730 Date: 2017.08.22 09:26:13 -07'00' FRANCISCO E. GONZALES, JR. ROBERT J. HALLAHAN Attorney Advisor, Office of Installation OPSEC Officer Command Judge Advocate Approved By: Digitally signed by ROGERS.GORDON.
    [Show full text]
  • Bw1 Foia Cbp 009584 Review Draft Environmental Impact Statement U.S
    SEPTEMBER2002 REVIEWDRAFT ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTSTATEMENT U.S.BORDERPATROL TUCSONANDYUMASECTORS ARIZONA IMMIGRATIONANDNATURALIZATIONSERVICE WASHINGTON,D.C. BW1 FOIA CBP 009584 REVIEW DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT U.S. BORDER PATROL TUCSON AND YUMA SECTORS September 2002 Lead Agency: Immigration and Naturalization Service 425 I Street NW Washington, D.C. 20536 Responsible Official: (b) (6) INS Environmental Officer INS Facilities and Engineering Division (b) (6) Point of Contact: (b) (6) USACE-Fort Worth INS A/E Resource Center (b) (6) BW1 FOIA CBP 009585 ABSTRACT PROPOSED ACTION: This USBP proposes to expand its current operations/activities and complete ongoing infrastructure projects. In addition to those projects currently being constructed, this alternative would include (b) (5) (b) (5) PURPOSE AND NEED: The improvements that have been completed or are being proposed by INS and USBP are in an effort to enhance the USBP’s capability to gain, maintain and extend control of the U.S.-Mexico border. ALTERNATIVES ADDRESSED: (b) (5) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTIONS: (b) (5) CONCLUSIONS: Potential impacts to threatened or endangered species, cultural resources sites, wetlands and other sensitive resources would be avoided to the extent practicable. Where impacts are unavoidable, mitigation measures to reduce or compensate for losses would be implemented and coordinated through the appropriate Federal and state resource agencies. No significant impacts to land use, soils, air quality, hazardous waste sites, or socioeconomic resources are expected. Implementation of best management practices and stormwater pollution prevention plans would be required, as appropriate, for construction activities to reduce any potential effects to soils, soil erosion, and water quality. Based upon the results of the PEIS and environmental design measures to be incorporated as part of the proposed action, it has been concluded that the proposed action will not have a significant impact on the environment.
    [Show full text]