DOCSLIB.ORG

Table of Contents 4.11 Mineral Resources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

4.11 Mineral Resources TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 4.11-1 4.11.1 Environmental Setting .................................................................................... 4.11-1 4.11.2 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................ 4.11-22 4.11.3 Significance Criteria ..................................................................................... 4.11-25 4.11.4 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................ 4.11-26 4.11.5 Applicant-Proposed Measures ...................................................................... 4.11-27 4.11.6 Mid-Line Series Capacitor Site Alternatives ................................................ 4.11-27 4.11.7 References ..................................................................................................... 4.11-29 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project ..................................................................................................................... 4.11-3 LIST OF TABLES Table 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project ................................................................................................................... 4.11-13 Table 4.11-2: Mineral Resource Zone Definitions ............................................................... 4.11-22 Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project Page 4.11-i Proponent's Environmental Assessment April 2018 This page intentionally left blank. 4.11 Mineral Resources 4.11 Mineral Resources This section describes the mineral resources in the area of the Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project (Proposed Project1), as well as potential impacts and alternatives. According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), a mineral resource is defined as a concentration of naturally occurring solid, liquid, or gaseous materials in or on the earth’s crust in such a form and quantity, and of such a grade or quality, that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction, either currently or in the future. Mineral resources include oil, natural gas, and metallic and non-metallic deposits. Mineral resources data were obtained from the following resources: . USGS . California Department of Conservation (DOC) . California Geological Survey (CGS) . County of San Bernardino General Plan . City of Hesperia General Plan . Clark County Comprehensive Plan . City of Boulder City Master Plan Aerial photographs were also used to analyze mineral resources in the vicinity of the Proposed Project. 4.11.1 Environmental Setting The Proposed Project is located in California and Nevada, within the Mojave Basin and Range (Mojave). Federal lands constitute a majority of the land area in the Mojave, including lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Park Service (NPS), Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and Department of Defense (DoD). The Proposed Project would modify three existing transmission lines that extend northeast from Lugo Substation (located in San Bernardino County, California) to Eldorado Substation (located in the City of Boulder City, Nevada) and Mohave Substation (located in Clark County, Nevada), and from Mohave Substation northwest to Eldorado Substation. Portions of the Proposed Project would also cross the City of Hesperia, California, the unincorporated community of Lucerne Valley in California, as well as the unincorporated communities of Searchlight and Laughlin in Nevada. Mineral Resources in the Proposed Project Area Based on a review of published sources and data from the USGS Mineral Resources Data System, there are no active mines2 and/or mineral plants within 1 mile of the Proposed Project. 1 The term “Proposed Project” is inclusive of all components of the Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project. Where the discussion in this section focuses on a particular component, that component is called out by its individual work area (e.g., “Ludlow Series Capacitor”). 2 Active mines are defined as U.S. mineral and metal operations that are monitored by the National Minerals Information Center of the USGS, surveyed by the USGS, and considered to be currently active as of 2003. Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project Page 4.11-1 Proponent's Environmental Assessment April 2018 4.11 Mineral Resources However, there are 48 sites with either producers,3 past producers, or mineral prospects located within 1 mile of the Proposed Project, as detailed in Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project4 and Table 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project. The DOC’s Office of Mine Reclamation (OMR) provides oversight for local governments as they administer the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) within their respective jurisdictions. Based on a review of existing mining operations from the DOC’s OMR, no active mines were located within 1 mile of the Proposed Project. The DOC Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) oversees the drilling, operation, maintenance, and plugging and abandonment of oil, natural gas, and geothermal wells in California, and tracks all known oil and gas wells. Based on a review of data from the DOC DOGGR, there are no oil wells located within 1 mile of the Proposed Project. Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs), as classified by the California State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB), were established to designate lands that contain mineral deposits. MRZ definitions are provided in Table 4.11-2: Mineral Resource Zone Definitions. A small portion of the Eldorado-Lugo 500 kV Transmission Line and Lugo-Mohave 500 kV Transmission Line are located in areas classified as MRZ-2a and MRZ-3a, as detailed in Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project. Within the MRZ areas, the Eldorado-Lugo 500 kV Transmission Line and Lugo-Mohave 500 kV Transmission Line do not cross any designated sectors, which are areas formally designated by the SMGB for lands containing mineral resources of regional or Statewide economic significance that are needed to meet future demand. 3 According to the USGS, producers are mines that produce on demand or seasonally with variable lengths of activity. In addition, producers are considered to be in production at the time of data entry into the Mineral Resources Data System. Past producers are considered to be mines formerly operating that have closed, where the equipment or structures may have been removed or abandoned. Mineral prospects are considered deposits that have gone beyond the occurrence stage; the deposits may or may not have undergone feasibility studies that would lead to a decision on going into production. 4 Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project does not show Proposed Project areas where resources do not occur. Page 4.11-2 Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project April 2018 Proponent's Environmental Assessment 40 ¨¦§ Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources, Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project Map 1 of 5 Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project Proposed Fiber Optic Repeater Location Eldorado - Lugo 500 kV Transmission Line Lugo - Mohave 500 kV Transmission Line Silver Mineral Resource Reef Mine Mineral Resource Zone State Boundary Interstate State Highway/US Highway Silver Cliff Iron Mountain-Bessemer-Lava Bed Copper Strand MRZ-3a Mine Red Hills Unnamed Shaft MRZ-3a UV247 Unnamed Prospect Unnamed Prospect Note: Any area that is not shown as MRZ-1, -2, or -3 has been designated as MRZ-4 and is unmapped. MRZ-4 areas contain no known mineral occurrences where geologic information does not rule out either the presence or absence of significant mineral resources. Unnamed Prospect Nevada Barstow Repeater Arizona California Peterson Limestone Deposit Star Dust Group Star Dust Group 1:140,000 Miles K 0 2 4 Source: Insignia, 2018; SCE, 2018; USGS - Mineral Resources Data System, 2016 Z:\Projects\SCE_Lugo\MXDs\PEA\Minerals\Minerals_v2.mxd 4/13/2018 This page intentionally left blank. Figure 4.11-1: Mineral Resources, Producers, Past Producers, and Prospects Within 1 Mile of the Proposed Project Map 2 of 5 Eldorado-Lugo-Mohave Series Capacitor Project # Existing Substation $ Proposed Mid-Line Capacitor Location Telecommunication Line Eldorado - Lugo 500 kV Transmission Line Lugo - Mohave 500 kV Transmission Line Transmission Line not part of Project Mineral Resource Mineral Resource Zone State Boundary Interstate Unnamed Heather Strontium Pumice Occurrence Prospect MRZ-3a Newberry Springs Lee Yim Deposit Series Capacitor Ludlow $ Series Reinerth # Prospect Fort Cady Pisgah $ Capacitor Unnamed Lee Yim Deposit Barite Substation Deposit Argos Deposit Hansen Fort Cady Unnamed Barite Process Strontianite Deposit Unnamed Pit Plant Prospect Unnamed MRZ-2a Mt. Pisgah Unnamed Pit Volcanic Strontium Newberry Cinders Occurrence Hectorite MRZ-2a Note: Any area that is not shown as MRZ-1, -2, or -3 has been Mine designated as MRZ-4 and is unmapped. MRZ-4 areas contain no known mineral occurrences where geologic information does not La
Recommended publications
  • NPCA Comments on Proposed Silurian

    NPCA Comments on Proposed Silurian

    Stanford MillsLegalClinic Environmental Law Clinic Crown Quadrangle LawSchool 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, CA 94305-8610 Tel 650 725-8571 Fax 650 723-4426 www.law.stanford.edu September 9, 2014 Via Electronic Mail and Federal Express James G. Kenna, State Director Bureau of Land Management California State Office 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W-1623 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916) 978-4400 [email protected] Katrina Symons Field Manager Bureau of Land Management Barstow Field Office 2601 Barstow Road Barstow, CA 92311 (760) 252-6004 [email protected] Dear State Director Kenna and Field Manager Symons: Enclosed please find comments by the National Parks Conservation Association (“NPCA”) on the solar and wind projects proposed by Iberdrola Renewables, Inc., in Silurian Valley, California. We understand that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) is currently considering whether to grant the Silurian Valley Solar Project a variance under the October 2012 Record of Decision for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States. We also understand that BLM is currently evaluating the Silurian Valley Wind Project under the National Environmental Policy Act. As the enclosed comments make clear, NPCA has serious concerns about the proposed projects’ compliance with applicable laws and policies, and about their potentially significant adverse effects on the Silurian Valley and surrounding region. We thank you for your consideration of these comments. NPCA looks forward to participating further in the administrative processes associated with the proposed projects. Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Hook, Certified Law Student Community Law ❖ Criminal Defense ❖ Environmental Law ❖ Immigrants’ Rights ❖ International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution ❖ Juelsgaard Intellectual Property and Innovation ❖ Organizations and Transactions ❖ Religious Liberty ❖Supreme Court Litigation ❖ Youth and Education Law Project Mr.
  • Newberry/Dead Mountains Scenic Backcountry Drive the 10-Mile One-Way Drive Is on Bureau of Land Management Public Lands

    Newberry/Dead Mountains Scenic Backcountry Drive the 10-Mile One-Way Drive Is on Bureau of Land Management Public Lands

    Newberry/Dead Mountains Scenic Backcountry Drive The 10-mile one-way drive is on Bureau of Land Management public lands. However, it is better to take this as a loop trail (see directions) so you don’t have to backtrack and can see other attractions. Although the road is gravel, it is in good condition and can be navigated by 2-wheel drive sedan vehicles, although high clearance is preferable. This particular scenic drive offers a wide range of vistas. Looking north are the Newberry Mountains with the prominent and sacred Spirit Mountain looming above the horizon. Looking south are the Dead Moun- tains which are also sacred to the native Indian tribes in the area. To the west are the granitic crystal hills with interesting rock formations. To the east is the Colorado River Valley and the high peaks of the Hualapai Range in Arizona as backdrop. The green fields along the Colorado River in this area are part of the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. The Fort Mojave Indian Reservation covers nearly 42,000 acres in the tri-state area of Arizona, California, and Nevada. The Mojave Indians are Pipa Aha Macav — “The People By The River.” Mojave culture traces the earthly origins of its people to Spirit Mountain. Newberry Mountains Newberry Mountains Prior to the arrival of white settler to the region, the Mojave Indians were prosperous farmers with well- established villages and trade networks that stretched as far away as the Pacific Ocean. In the 16th Century, the time the Spanish arrived in the territory, the Mojave’s were the largest concentration of people in the Southwest.
  • Miocene Low-Angle Normal Faulting and Dike Emplacement, Homer Mountain and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern California and Southernmost Nevada

    Miocene Low-Angle Normal Faulting and Dike Emplacement, Homer Mountain and Surrounding Areas, Southeastern California and Southernmost Nevada

    Miocene low-angle normal faulting and dike emplacement, Homer Mountain and surrounding areas, southeastern California and southernmost Nevada JON E. SPENCER* U.S. Geological Survey, 345 Middlefleld Road, Menlo Park, California 94025 ABSTRACT tions, differed radically from the state of that collectively accommodated as much as 50% stress in the upper plate, as inferred from to 100% extension of upper-plate rocks (Ander- Homer Mountain and surrounding regions fault geometry. Low-angle faulting and east- son, 1971). In many areas, normal faults within are within, or adjacent to, the western part of northeast-west-southwest distension of up- upper-plate rocks merge with, or are truncated a broad region of low-angle normal faults ex- per-plate rocks reflect regional reduction of by, a basal, subhorizontal fault often referred to posed within the lower Colorado River compression in the east-northeast-west- as a "detachment fault" (for example, see Davis trough. During middle Miocene time, upper- southwest direction and associated large- and others, 1980). The term "detachment fault" plate rocks in the Homer, Sacramento, Dead, scale east-northeast-west-southwest crustal is used here to indicate a low-angle normal fault and Newberry Mountains moved eastward or extension. In contrast, concave-upward flex- that formed at a low angle (for example, Wer- northeastward, relative to the lower plate, ure of the lower plate, in response to tectonic nicke and others, 1984; Reynolds and Spsncer, above single or multiple low-angle normal denudation and resultant isostatic uplift, is in- 1985). The interpretation that detachment faults faults. Deposition of coarse clastic sedimen- ferred to have produced local subhorizontal are rooted faults that accommodate crustal ex- tary rocks occurred during extensional fault- compression at shallow crustal levels in the tension (Wernicke, 1981; Howard and John, ing and was accompanied by, and closely lower plate that overwhelmed the regional 1983; Davis and others, 1983; Allmendinger followed by, eruption of basaltic volcanics.
  • Pipeline and Processing Fac... - Pipeline Projects with Length Greater Than 20 Miles

    Pipeline and Processing Fac... - Pipeline Projects with Length Greater Than 20 Miles

    12/29/2015 Pipeline and Processing Fac... - Pipeline projects with Length Greater than 20 Miles Pipeline projects with DEC-29-2015 Pipeline and Processing Facilities : SAVED REPORTS Length Greater than 1:37 PM 20 Miles Pipeline projects with Length Greater than 20 Miles Holding Company or Parent Operating Company: Project Status Project Project Name: Length Organization: Type: (New Miles) AK (6 Pipeline projects) Energia Cura Fairbanks Pipeline Doubtful New Arctic Fox (Fairbanks Pipeline) 443 Company Linc Energy Linc Energy On New Umiat Oil Field Pipeline 80 Hold/Postponed Alaska Housing Finance Alaska Gasline On New Alaska Stand Alone Pipeline (ASAP) 737 Corporation Development Hold/Postponed Corporation BP BP Under New Point Thomson Gas Field 22 Construction NovaGold Resources Inc. Donlin Gold, LLC Advanced New Donlin Gold 312 Development Alaska LNG Early New Alaska LNG (AKLNG) 800 Development TOT 2,394 AL (6 Pipeline projects) Southern Company Alabama Power Under New Gaston Natural Gas Pipeline 30 Construction Spectra Energy Spectra Energy Advanced New Sabal Trail 515 Development Williams Company Transcontinental Gas Early New Hillabee Expansion Project Phase 1 20 Pipeline Company LLC Development Miller Energy Resources Early New Trans - Foreland Pipeline (TFPL) system 23 Development Laclede Gas Alagasco On-going Replacement Alagasco Pipeline replacement program 850 PRP Williams Company Transcontinental Gas Early New Hillabee Expansion Project Phase 2 and 3 24 Pipeline Company LLC Development TOT 1,462 Alberta (43 Pipeline projects) TransCanada Imperial Oil Early New Mackenzie Gas Project 758 Development Enbridge Inc. Enbridge Income Fund Advanced New Northern Gateway Pipeline (westward 731 Development crude for export) TransCanada TransCanada Advanced New Keystone XL 1,661 Development Enhance Energy Inc.
  • 2021 INVESTOR DAY January 27, 2021 Disclosure Forward-Looking Statements / Non-GAAP Financial Measures / Industry & Market Data

    2021 INVESTOR DAY January 27, 2021 Disclosure Forward-Looking Statements / Non-GAAP Financial Measures / Industry & Market Data

    2021 INVESTOR DAY January 27, 2021 Disclosure Forward-looking statements / non-GAAP financial measures / industry & market data General – The information contained in this presentation does not purport to be all‐inclusive or to contain all information that prospective investors may require. Prospective investors are encouraged to conduct their own analysis and review of information contained in this presentation as well as important additional information through the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) EDGAR system at www.sec.gov and on our website at www.kindermorgan.com. Forward-Looking Statements – This presentation includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). Forward-looking statements include any statement that does not relate strictly to historical or current facts and include statements accompanied by or using words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “projection,” “forecast,” “strategy,” “outlook,” “continue,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “will,” “shall,” and “long-term”. In particular, statements, express or implied, concerning future actions, conditions or events, including long term demand for our assets and services, opportunities related to alternative energy sources, future operating results or the ability to generate revenues, income or cash flow or to pay dividends are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. There is no assurance that any of the actions, events or results of the forward-looking statements will occur, or if any of them do, what impact they will have on our results of operations or financial condition.
  • Notice of Availability For

    Notice of Availability For

    NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR THE CALNEV (KINDER-MORGAN) PIPELINE EXPANSION PROJECT (SCH #2008031071) The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), together with the County of San Bernardino (County), California, has prepared a Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the proposed Calnev Pipeline Expansion Project from Colton, Calif. to Las Vegas, Nev. The BLM and the County of San Bernardino have prepared the EIS/EIR to evaluate potential impacts associated with the proposed Calnev Pipeline Expansion Project and Alternatives. This project is proposed by Calnev Pipeline, LLC, a subsidiary of Kinder-Morgan Energy Partners. The Draft EIS/EIR for the Calnev Pipeline Expansion Project is available for public review and comment. The Pipeline Expansion Project includes the construction, operation, and maintenance of 233 miles of new 16-inch diameter pipeline on approximately 2,841 acres of land under multiple ownership (BLM manages 1,239 acres of the land the proposed pipeline would cross) from the North Colton Terminal to the Bracken Junction near McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, which would parallel the existing system for most of the route (see attached map). In addition to the new pipeline, the proposed project would include a new pump station, electrical substation, and ancillary facilities near Baker, Calif.; a new 3-mile lateral from the Bracken Junction to McCarran International Airport; and new or modified connections to new or modified laterals, valves, and ancillary modifications. The proposed pipelines primarily traverse undeveloped lands administered by the BLM. Other federally managed lands in the proposed project area include land under the jurisdiction of the U.S.
  • The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended

    The California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 As Amended

    the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as amended U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Desert District Riverside, California the California Desert CONSERVATION AREA PLAN 1980 as Amended IN REPLY REFER TO United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT STATE OFFICE Federal Office Building 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, California 95825 Dear Reader: Thank you.You and many other interested citizens like you have made this California Desert Conservation Area Plan. It was conceived of your interests and concerns, born into law through your elected representatives, molded by your direct personal involvement, matured and refined through public conflict, interaction, and compromise, and completed as a result of your review, comment and advice. It is a good plan. You have reason to be proud. Perhaps, as individuals, we may say, “This is not exactly the plan I would like,” but together we can say, “This is a plan we can agree on, it is fair, and it is possible.” This is the most important part of all, because this Plan is only a beginning. A plan is a piece of paper-what counts is what happens on the ground. The California Desert Plan encompasses a tremendous area and many different resources and uses. The decisions in the Plan are major and important, but they are only general guides to site—specific actions. The job ahead of us now involves three tasks: —Site-specific plans, such as grazing allotment management plans or vehicle route designation; —On-the-ground actions, such as granting mineral leases, developing water sources for wildlife, building fences for livestock pastures or for protecting petroglyphs; and —Keeping people informed of and involved in putting the Plan to work on the ground, and in changing the Plan to meet future needs.
  • Geographic Names

    Geographic Names

    GEOGRAPHIC NAMES CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES ? REVISED TO JANUARY, 1911 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1911 PREPARED FOR USE IN THE GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE BY THE UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHIC BOARD WASHINGTON, D. C, JANUARY, 1911 ) CORRECT ORTHOGRAPHY OF GEOGRAPHIC NAMES. The following list of geographic names includes all decisions on spelling rendered by the United States Geographic Board to and including December 7, 1910. Adopted forms are shown by bold-face type, rejected forms by italic, and revisions of previous decisions by an asterisk (*). Aalplaus ; see Alplaus. Acoma; township, McLeod County, Minn. Abagadasset; point, Kennebec River, Saga- (Not Aconia.) dahoc County, Me. (Not Abagadusset. AQores ; see Azores. Abatan; river, southwest part of Bohol, Acquasco; see Aquaseo. discharging into Maribojoc Bay. (Not Acquia; see Aquia. Abalan nor Abalon.) Acworth; railroad station and town, Cobb Aberjona; river, IVIiddlesex County, Mass. County, Ga. (Not Ackworth.) (Not Abbajona.) Adam; island, Chesapeake Bay, Dorchester Abino; point, in Canada, near east end of County, Md. (Not Adam's nor Adams.) Lake Erie. (Not Abineau nor Albino.) Adams; creek, Chatham County, Ga. (Not Aboite; railroad station, Allen County, Adams's.) Ind. (Not Aboit.) Adams; township. Warren County, Ind. AJjoo-shehr ; see Bushire. (Not J. Q. Adams.) Abookeer; AhouJcir; see Abukir. Adam's Creek; see Cunningham. Ahou Hamad; see Abu Hamed. Adams Fall; ledge in New Haven Harbor, Fall.) Abram ; creek in Grant and Mineral Coun- Conn. (Not Adam's ties, W. Va. (Not Abraham.) Adel; see Somali. Abram; see Shimmo. Adelina; town, Calvert County, Md. (Not Abruad ; see Riad. Adalina.) Absaroka; range of mountains in and near Aderhold; ferry over Chattahoochee River, Yellowstone National Park.
  • Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land

    Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan Proposed Land

    DRECP Proposed LUPA and Final EIS CHAPTER III.8. CULTURAL RESOURCES III.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES This chapter presents the Affected Environment for the Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) Decision Area and the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) area for cultural resources. These areas overlap, and in the following programmatic discussion are referred to broadly as the “California Desert Region.” More than 32,000 cultural resources are known in the DRECP area in every existing environmental context ⎼ from mountain crests to dry lake beds ⎼ and include both surface and subsurface deposits. Cultural resources are categorized as buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts (including cultural landscapes and Traditional Cultural Properties) under the federal National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Historic properties are cultural resources included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), maintained by the Secretary of the Interior (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 60.4). See Section III.8.1.1 for more information on federal regulations and historic properties. This chapter discusses three types of cultural resources classified by their origins: prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic. Prehistoric cultural resources are associated with the human occupation of California prior to prolonged European contact. These resources may include sites and deposits, structures, artifacts, rock art, trails, and other traces of Native American human behavior. In California, the prehistoric period began over 12,000 years ago and extended through the eighteenth century until 1769, when the first Europeans settled in California. Ethnographic resources represent the heritage of a particular ethnic or cultural group, such as Native Americans or African, European, Latino, or Asian immigrants.
  • Form 10-K Kinder Morgan, Inc

    Form 10-K Kinder Morgan, Inc

    Table of Contents UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 _____________ Form 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) [X] OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 or TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) [ ] OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from _____to_____ Commission file number: 001-35081 Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) Delaware 80-0682103 (State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer incorporation or organization) Identification No.) 1001 Louisiana Street, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas 77002 (Address of principal executive offices) (zip code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: 713-369-9000 ____________ Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered Class P Common Stock New York Stock Exchange Warrants to Purchase Class P Common Stock New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933. Yes No o Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Yes o No Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
  • Ca-Lower-Colorado-River-Valley-Pkwy

    Ca-Lower-Colorado-River-Valley-Pkwy

    I • I I I ) I I A REPORT TO THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES ---1 I 'I I I I THE LOWER I COLORADO I RIVER I VALLEY • PARKWAY I I D- '°'le> F; 1-e. ·• NFS- ' f\CAc:.+... \ V"C. , ~ P,of>oseol I ~~~~=-'~c f~l~~c~~w I THE LOWER COLORADO I filVERVALLEYPARKWAY I I I A proposal for a National Parkway and Scenic Recreation Road System along the Lower Colorado River Valley in 'I California, Arizona, and Nevada. I NATIONAL PARK .i DENVER SEfiViC I ·-.-:. a.t ..1flkllb""ll.--';,.i. n II"~ r.· " •· \..' ;: · I ;:~::::.;.;:;.:J I I I U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service I in cooperation with Lower Colorado River Office Bureau of Land Management • PLE~\SE RtTUR?j TO: I February 1969 I , lJnited States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY I WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 I I Dear Mr. President: We are pleased to transmit herewith. a report on the feasibility anc;l desirability of developing a nation~l p;;i.rkwa,y and sc;enic recreation I road system within. the Lower C9l9rado River· Vaiiey in Arizona, Califo~nia, and Nevada, from the Lake Mead National Recreation I Area and Davis Dam on the north to the International Boup.d:;i.ry ~ith Mexico on the south in: the vicinity of San Luis, Arizqna arid Mexic.o.· . ·. ' .. ·.' . ·. I This :i;eport is based on ci. study 11,'lade by the Lower Col<;>rado River Office ap.d the NatiQnal :Par~ Service pf this Depa.rtmep.t with engineerin.g assistance by the Buqlau of Public Roads of the Departmep.t of .
  • Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation

    Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation

    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Books, Reports, and Studies Resources, Energy, and the Environment 2004 Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation University of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/books_reports_studies Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons Citation Information Special Use Provisions in Wilderness Legislation (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 2004). Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School. SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION Natural Resources Law Center University of Colorado School of Law 401 UCB Boulder, Colorado 80309-0401 2004 Table of Contents SPECIAL USE PROVISIONS IN WILDERNESS LEGISLATION ........................................................... 1 I. Overview ................................................................................................................................. 1 II. Specific Special Use Provisions............................................................................................. 1 A. Water Rights ....................................................................................................................