U.S. Department of the Interior

Bureau of Land Management October 2017

Crown Castle Communication Site Access Road and Otero Electric Cooperative Power Line Right-of-Way

Environmental Assessment DOI-BLM-NM-L000-2017-0023-EA

North of 12 Hunter Road Otero County, New Mexico

/s/ Anthony Hom 10/20/2017 Signature and Title of Project Lead Date

/s/ Ikumi Doucette 10/20/2017 Signature of Planning & Environmental Coordinator Date

Las Cruces District Office 1800 Marquess Street Las Cruces, New Mexico 88005 575-525-4300 Environmental Assessment

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1 1.1 Background ...... 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ...... 1-1 1.3 Decision to be Made ...... 1-1 1.3.1 Relationship to Statutes and Regulations ...... 1-2 1.3.2 Plan Conformance ...... 1-2 1.4 Scope of Analysis ...... 1-2 1.5 Scoping and Issues ...... 1-2 1.1.1 Internal Scoping ...... 1-2 1.1.2 External Scoping ...... 1-2 1.5.1 Project Resource Review ...... 1-3 2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ...... 2-5 Proposed Action ...... 2-5 No Action Alternative ...... 2-6 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis ...... 2-7 Project Design Features ...... 2-7 3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ...... 3-7 Soils ...... 3-7 3.1.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-7 3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-8 Surface Water ...... 3-9 3.2.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-9 3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-9 Vegetation ...... 3-10 3.3.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-10 3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-11 Special Status Species ...... 3-11 3.4.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-12 3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-18 Cultural and Historic Resources ...... 3-18 3.5.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-19 3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-20 Lands and Realty ...... 3-20 3.6.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-20 3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-20 Air Quality and Noise ...... 3-21 3.7.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-21 3.7.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-21

October 2017 i Environmental Assessment

Visual Resources ...... 3-21 3.8.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-21 3.8.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-22 Environmental Justice ...... 3-22 3.9.1 Affected Environment ...... 3-22 3.9.2 Environmental Consequences ...... 3-22 4.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ...... 4-23 Methodology ...... 4-23 4.1.1 Identification of Cumulative Effect Issues ...... 4-23 4.1.2 Geographic and Temporal Boundaries ...... 4-23 4.1.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ...... 4-24 5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ...... 5-26 6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...... 6-26 7.0 REFERENCES ...... 7-27

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Project Resource Review ...... 1-3 Table 2. Property Ownership/ROW Information...... 2-6 Table 3. Characteristics of Soil Units within the Proposed Action Area ...... 3-8 Table 4. Estimated Soil Erosion Hazard Rating ...... 3-8 Table 5. Waterbodies Identified within the vicinity of the Proposed Action Area ...... 3-9 Table 6. Species Inventory ...... 3-10 Table 7. Threatened and Endangered Species ...... 3-13 Table 8. USFWS IPaC and NMDGF BISON-M Lists of Migratory Birds with Potential to Occur in Project Area ...... 3-16 Table 9. Previously Recorded Cultural Sites Eligible for Listing on the NRHP within the Proposed Action Area and Vicinity ...... 3-19 Table 10. Trileaf (Consultant) Preparers ...... 6-26 Table 11. BLM Reviewers ...... 6-27

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Site Plan and Maps Appendix B – Utility Structures Appendix C – Site Photographs Appendix D – Natural Resources Appendix E – Cultural Resources Appendix F – Native American Correspondence Appendix G – Personnel Resumes Appendix H – BLM General Guide Stipulations

October 2017 ii Environmental Assessment

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation APE Area of Potential Effect BGPA Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act BISON-M Biota Information System of New Mexico, New Mexico Department of Game and Fish BLM Bureau of Land Management CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CFR Code of Federal Regulations ESA Endangered Species Act EA Environmental Assessment EMNRD New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department FCC Federal Communications Commission FLPMA Federal Land Policy Management Act IPaC Information for Planning and Conservation MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NMCRIS New Mexico Cultural Resources Information System NMDGF New Mexico Department of Game and Fish NMSA New Mexico Statutes Annotated, New Mexico Wildlife Conservation Act NPA Nationwide Programmatic Agreement NRHP National Register of Historic Places RMP Resource Management Plan ROW Right-of-Way SHPO State Historic Preservation Office/Officer TCNS Tower Construction Notification System USDOI United States Department of the Interior USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS United States Geological Survey

1

October 2017 iii

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Crown Castle proposes to construct and operate an unmanned communications facility in the general vicinity of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, NM 88314. The approximate coordinate location is 33-10-59.263 N, 105-50-52.052 W.

Project activities would include the construction of a 195-foot tall self-support communication tower with an overall height of 199 feet. The tower and associated ground based equipment would be located within a 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square foot) lease area. Power and telecommunications would be provided to the site via a proposed pole line utility right-of-way, provided by Otero County Electric Cooperatives, Inc. (Otero Electric Coop), generally following Hunter Road extending approximately 1.88 miles north from U.S. Highway 70 to the proposed lease area; 33 utility poles would be installed as the utility right-of-way. Majority of the poles would be installed and aligned with the existing access road. The site would be accessed using an existing access road, Hunter Road, measuring approximately 20 feet wide extending approximately 2.42 miles generally north connecting to north of the site. The access road and pole line utility right-of-way would traverse generally south through private land and land administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) until it terminates at U.S. Highway 70.

Parts of the pole line utility right-of-way and access road for this site extend through BLM- administered lands.

1.1 BACKGROUND

As this area is predominantly open rural rangeland, there is a high demand for a telecommunications tower at this location to accommodate the existing and future wireless coverage. The proposed telecommunication facility will cover a broad area and deploy a comprehensive network. The proposed lease area on private land is the only lease area available that will satisfy the demand.

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

The purpose of the action alternatives in this EA is to provide legal and physical access and aerial utility line across public land to a private property lease held by Crown Castle for the development of a communication facility.

The need is established by BLM’s responsibility to respond to applications submitted by Crown Castle and Otero County Electric Cooperative for the subject road segment and aerial utility line segment under section 501(a) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), to issue right of way (ROW) grants for the construction, maintenance, operation, and termination of a road and aerial utility line on Public Land. The principles of sustained yield include safeguarding wildlife and their habitat; threatened species and their habitat; endangered species and their habitat; sensitive species and their habitat; water quality; soils; paleontological and archaeological resources; vegetation; and watershed functions. Goals and objectives for these resources were set forth in the White Sands Resources Management Plan (RMP) (October 1986).

1.3 DECISION TO BE MADE

This environmental assessment (EA) analyzes two alternatives: the Proposed Action (construction of a new communications facility, authorization of an existing access road, and construction of an aerial utility line right-of-way), and the no action (not to construct facilities). This EA also discusses the environmental consequences of implementing the alternatives. The Environmental Assessment 1-1

deciding authorized officer for the proposed action is the Las Cruces District Manager. Based on the information provided in this EA, the BLM would decide whether to grant ROW serial numbers NMNM 135474 and NMNM 136553 to Crown Castle and Otero County Electric Cooperative respectively, for an access road and aerial power line, and under what terms and conditions. BLM would also issue separate ROW, NMNM 13655301 for a communication line which would collocate on NMNM 136553 facilities.

1.3.1 Relationship to Statutes and Regulations

This EA was written in conformance with the BLM Land Use Planning Requirements Section 201 and 202 of the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA, 43 U.S.C 1711-1712); the regulations in 43 Code of Regulations (CFR) 1600, and in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its implementing Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations at 40 CFR 1500-1508. This EA has been prepared in accordance with the BLM NEPA Handbook H-1790-1 (2008).

1.3.2 Plan Conformance

This proposed action conforms with the White Sands RMP approved October 1986 and is specifically provided for in the General Management Guidance regarding ROW’s which states that, “The BLM grants utility and transportation rights-of-way (ROWs) leases, and permits to individuals, businesses, and governmental entities for the use of the public land” (p.11). The guidance also states that such ROW leases/permits are granted in order to protect natural and cultural resources, and promote maximum utilization of existing ROWs.

1.4 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS

In order for the telecommunication facility to be built at the proposed site, proposed legal and physical access and the construction of an aerial utility line on BLM land would need to be reviewed and approved by the BLM. Although the telecommunication facility would not be located on BLM-administered land, access to this proposed site is required across BLM-administered land. Therefore, the telecommunications facility is considered a connected non-federal action as defined in the BLM NEPA Handbook H-1790-1, and will be analyzed in detail as part of the proposed action.

1.5 SCOPING AND ISSUES

1.1.1 Internal Scoping

Internal scoping was conducted with the Las Cruces District Office BLM interdisciplinary team on December 12th, 2016.

1.1.2 External Scoping

Project information was sent to the following entities: the public, local government agencies, the local historical society, the USFWS, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF), the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD), Native American Tribes, and the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Copies of all correspondence are included in Appendices D, E, and F.

Environmental Assessment 1-2

1.5.1 Project Resource Review

The BLM considers resources and uses that occur on public lands and the issues that may result from the implementation of the proposed action or alternatives. A preliminary analysis of resources is presented in Error! Reference source not found.. The resources that are deemed not present in the Proposed Action Area, or present but not affected, are noted as such with a description of the rationale. The resources that are present in the Proposed Action Area and may be affected by the proposed action or alternatives are assessed in Chapter 3 of this EA.

Table 1. Project Resource Review Present/ Not Not Element Present Affected Present Rationale/ Reference Section Soils X 3.1 Mineral resources Proposed project does not include mining X operation. As such, impacts to mineral resources would be minimal. Paleontological X resources Surface water X 3.2 Groundwater X Wetlands/riparian A review of the topographic map, soil zones composition, and wetlands map was completed. Based on this review, the site was not found to be located in a recognized X national wetland area. Based on the distance between the site and the closest wetlands, no effects to wetlands are anticipated. Please see Table 5 (Chapter 3.2.1) for identified water bodies. Wild and scenic X rivers Vegetation X 3.3 Wildlife and habitat Given the scope of work proposed, changes X in habitat for wildlife are expected to be minimal. Special status X 3.4 species (include plants) Migratory birds Per the NMDGF’s recommendation, construction should occur outside of the X migratory bird breeding season of April 1 to September 15 Farmlands (prime or X unique) Grazing X management Realty X 3.6 Transportation X Historic Trails X Cultural resources X 3.5

Environmental Assessment 1-3

Present/ Not Not Element Present Affected Present Rationale/ Reference Section Traditional cultural places/Native X American religious concerns Air quality X 3.7 Climate change X Recreation X Visual resources X 3.8 Wilderness X Characteristics Wilderness Study X Areas Areas of Critical Environmental X Concern National Monuments X Wildland Fire X Noise X 3.7 Socioeconomic X values Environmental 3.9 X justice Solid or hazardous Phase I assessment was conducted for the wastes Proposed Action Area on December 1, 2015; X the assessment revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property

Environmental Assessment 1-4

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

PROPOSED ACTION

Crown Castle proposes to construct and Figure 1. Map of the proposed action (access road and aerial operate an unmanned communications utility line) and connected non-federal action facility. The site location is detailed below in (telecommunication facility). Table 1. Project activities would include the construction of a 195-foot tall self-support Proposed Action Area communication tower with an overall height Access Road Powerline of 199 feet. The tower and associated ground based equipment would be located within a 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square foot) lease area on private land. The site Proposed would be accessed using an existing 20-foot telecommunication facility Site wide access road which would extend approximately 2.42 miles generally north from US Highway 70 before connecting to an access road north of the site (see Figure 1 and Appendix A for further details). An aerial utility line, proposed by Otero County Electric Cooperative, would include electric power and communications. The aerial utility line would extend approximately 1.88 miles generally north from existing facilities on private land near US Highway 70, BLM managed towards the proposed lease area and lands includes 33 proposed utility poles to be installed. The wooden utility poles range from 30 to 40 feet in length. Each pole would be buried 10% of the length with an additional 2 feet. Of the 33 poles, seven (7) poles are proposed to be installed on BLM- administered land, and 26 poles are to be installed on privately owned lands. The proposed poles would be installed and mostly aligned with the existing access road. Five (5) poles would be installed outside the existing access road, which would require new ground disturbances, while 28 poles would be installed within the existing access road. Ground disturbance would be a 20-foot radius around each pole. On the BLM-administered land, proposed utility poles align with the existing road. As the existing access road is not proposed to be modified, ground disturbance would be limited to the proposed tower and associated equipment lease area and the proposed aerial utility line.

Total project area, which includes an existing access road that is not proposed to be modified, aerial utility line right-of-way, and tower lease area is approximately 6.6 acres. Of the 6.6 acres, approximately 89% (5.9 acres) is on privately owned lands, and approximately 11% (0.7 acres) Environmental Assessment 2-5

is on BLM administered land. See the aerial photographs, topographic maps, and site plans included in Appendix A for more details. Under the proposed action and connected non-federal action, operations at the Proposed Action Area would be extended, creating a reasonably foreseeable future time frame beginning in approximately 2017 and ending if the tower becomes obsolete and taken out of service. The site is expected to take 60 to 120 days to construct; however, the actual time period could vary depending on difficulty of construction and other factors.

In order to reduce impact from the proposed action, BLM’s standard design features would be incorporated into the proposed project actions (Appendix H). Crown Castle and Otero Electric Coop have agreed to adhere to the standard design features.

Table 2. Property Ownership/ROW Information.

Proposed Lease Area Private

Proposed 20’ Wide Access and Utility Private right-of-way (North of BLM land)

NMNM 136553/NMNM 13655301: Proposed 40’ Wide by 1,570’ Long BLM Aerial Utility Right-of-Way

NMNM 135474: Proposed 20’ Wide BLM by 1,720’ Long Road Right-of-way

Proposed 20’ Wide Access and Utility Private right-of-way (South of BLM land)

Proposed 20’ Wide Pole Line Utility Private Right-of-way (South of BLM land)

Underlying Parcel (Primera Vista Private Ranch LLC)

NMNM 135474 (access road) BLM ROW Serial #’s NMNM 136553 (power line)/NMNM 13655301 (collocated communication line)

Please refer to the Appendix A for detailed Site Location Information

NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE

Under the No Action Alternative, the ROWs for the Crown Castle and Otero County Electric Cooperative would not be authorized. The Proposed Action would not be undertaken, the new facility would not be built and would not enhance or meet the communication coverage needed.

Environmental Assessment 2-6

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED FROM DETAILED ANALYSIS

Another alternative considered was the collocation of antennas on an existing structure within an approximately one (1) mile search radius of the proposed site. This alternative would limit new construction and disturbance by utilizing areas that have already been disturbed and/or developed. This alternative was eliminated from detailed analysis because there are no other existing telecommunication facilities or suitable structures in the area for collocation consideration located within the search radius.

PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES

The project design features (Appendix H) would be incorporated into the project design and implemented during construction and operation of the Coyote Canyon Project.

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This Chapter describes the existing condition of the natural and human environment in the Proposed Action Area (the affected environment) and analyzes the potential environmental consequences that may result from the implementation of the proposed action and connected non-federal action and the no action alternative.

The discussion of environmental consequences considers potential direct and indirect effects. Direct impacts are those which would be caused by the proposed action and would occur at the same time and place as that action. Indirect impacts are caused by actions that are not a direct part of the project, but occur either later in time or outside the study area. Indirect impacts include those which may result from the connected non-federal action, in accordance with the BLM NEPA Handbook, which states, “If the connected non-federal action and its effects can be prevented by BLM decision-making, then the effects of the non-federal action are properly considered indirect effects of the BLM action…” (2008, p. 46).

Cumulative impacts which may result from the implementation of the alternatives considered in this EA are discussed in Chapter 4.0.

SOILS

3.1.1 Affected Environment

According to the USGS soil map (Appendix A), the lease area is underlain by Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex and Pena-Aztec variant association. The access road and utility right-of-way extend onto Deama, Rock Outcrop, Holloman Variant, Pena, and Aztec Variant soils. The profiles for these soils are depicted in the Error! Reference source not found.3 and estimated soil erosion hazard ratings in Table 4 below.

Environmental Assessment 3-7

Table 3. Characteristics of Soil Units within the Proposed Action Area

Map Setting and Hydric Unit Map Unit Name Soil Profile Composition (Y/N) Found in summits, 0-14 inches, very gravelly shoulder, backslopes, DSF Deama loam toeslopes, and N 14-60 inches, bedrock footslopes of ridges and mountains Found in summits, DSF Rock Outcrop 0-60 inches, bedrock shoulders, and N backslopes of hills Found in toeslopes, 0-12 inches, gravelly loam footslopes, backslopes, DSF Holloman Variant N 12-60 inches, bedrock should, and summits of mountains and ridges 0-7 inches, loam 7-16 inches, gravelly loam Found in rises of fan PAE Pena N 16-60 inches, very gravelly piedmonts loam 0-8 inches, gravelly fine sandy loam Found in rises of fan PAE Aztec Variant N 8-60 inches, very gravelly piedmonts and ridges gypsiferous sandy loam

Table 4. Estimated Soil Erosion Hazard Rating

Map Erosion Hazard Unit Surface Rating (Road/

Symbol Map Unit Name Texture Approximate Percent Clay Approximate Percent Sand Approximate Percent Silt Trail) Deama-Rock gravelly DSF outcrop-Holloman 10 65 25 Moderate loam variant complex Pena-Aztec PAE loam 20 40 40 Low variant association The forms used to calculate the estimated surface soil erosion hazard rating is located in Appendix D.

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

Ground disturbance within the tower and equipment lease area is anticipated to be approximately 100%. Electrical power and telecommunications would be provided to the site via a proposed utility pole line located within a utility right-of-way generally following Hunter Road extending approximately 1.88 miles north from U.S. Highway 70 towards the proposed lease area; 33 utility poles would be installed within the utility right-of-way. Majority of the poles would be installed and aligned with the existing access road. The site would be accessed using an existing access road, Hunter Road, measuring approximately 20 feet wide extending approximately 2.42 miles generally north connecting to an existing access road north of the site.

Environmental Assessment 3-8

No Action

Under the no action alternative, no additional disturbance to soils, wetlands, or living resources would occur.

SURFACE WATER

3.2.1 Affected Environment

Site reconnaissance was conducted on October 19, 2015. Several ephemeral washes were observed in the vicinity of the project area. No flowing streams or rivers were observed in the vicinity of the project area.

Table 5. Waterbodies Identified within the vicinity of the Proposed Action Area

Water Body Type Water Body Name Direction from Tower Distance from Tower Ephemeral Stream Unnamed SE 0.40 miles Ephemeral Stream Unnamed ESE 0.43 miles Seasonal Wash Unnamed SE 0.84 miles Seasonal Wash Unnamed SSE 1.00 miles Creek Tularosa Creek S 1.60 miles Freshwater Pond Unnamed SSW 1.77 miles (Agricultural) Freshwater Pond Unnamed S 1.83 miles (Agricultural) Freshwater Pond Unnamed SSW 2.10 miles (Agricultural)

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

Ground disturbance within the tower and equipment lease area is approximately 100%. Power and telecommunication lines would be provided to the site via a proposed pole line utility right-of- way generally following Hunter Road extending approximately 1.88 miles north from U.S. Highway 70 to the proposed lease area; 33 utility poles would be installed within the utility right-of-way. Of these utility poles, 27 would be installed along the existing road, one would be installed along a different existing road, and five would be installed slightly outside the existing road. The site would be accessed using an existing access road, Hunter Road, measuring approximately 20 feet wide extending approximately 2.42 miles generally north connecting to an existing access road north of the site. No modification to the existing road is proposed for this project. The existing access road and proposed utility right-of-way do not cross any flowing streams, rivers or ephemeral washes. The total project area including the existing access road, proposed pole line utility right-of-way, and proposed tower and equipment lease area is approximately 6.6 acres. Of the 6.6 acres, approximately 89% (5.9 acres) is on privately owned lands, and approximately 11% (0.7 acres) is on BLM administered land.

Environmental Assessment 3-9

No Action Figure 2. Map to show the location of pole installation associated with the proposed action. Under the No Action Alternative, access and pole line utility right-of-way to the proposed Proposed Action Area telecommunication facility would not be Access Road granted, and therefore the proposed facility Powerline would not be constructed. Under the No Action Locations of pole Alternative, there would be no impacts to the installation surrounding environment.

VEGETATION

3.3.1 Affected Environment

Site reconnaissance was conducted on October 19, 2015. The site consists of Pinyon- Juniper habitat which may provide habitat for three federally and state protected plant species: Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri), Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta), and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii). As such, plant surveys for the three species were conducted on June 7-8, 2016. See section 3.4, Special Status Species, and Appendix D for the Plant Survey Report and associated documents.

During an additional plant survey conducted on May 10, 2017, an informal species survey was conducted and the following plants were observed:

Table 6. Species Inventory

Scientific Name USDA Code Common Name Rhus trilobata RHTR skunkbush sumac Nolina texana NOTE Texas sacahuista Yucca baccata YUBA banana yucca Bahia absinthifolia BAAB hairyseed bahia Brickellia brachyphylla BRBR2 plumed brickellbush Berberis haematocarpa BEHA red barberry Physaria fendleri LEFE Fendler's bladderpod Echinocereus triglochidiatus ECTR kingcup cactus Opuntia phaeacantha OPPH tulip pricklypear Juniperus monosperma JUMO oneseed juniper Dalea formosa DAFO featherplume Garrya ovata subsp. goldmanii GAOVG Goldman's silktassel Hedeoma drummondii HEDR Drummond's false pennyroyal Environmental Assessment 3-10

Pinus edulis PIED twoneedle pinyon Aristida purpurea ARPU9 purple threeawn Bouteloua gracilis BOGR2 blue grama Lycurus LYCUR wolfstail Polygala alba POAL4 white milkwort Physalis hederifolia PHHE4 ivyleaf groundcherry

3.3.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

Ground disturbance within the tower and equipment lease area is approximately 100%, and potentially any present vegetation will be removed. Power and telecommunications would be provided to the site via the proposed pole line utility right-of-way generally following Hunter Road extending approximately 1.88 miles north from U.S. Highway 70 to the proposed lease area; 33 utility poles would be installed within the proposed utility right-of-way. Twenty-eight (28) of the poles would be installed and aligned within the existing, approximately 2.42 mile road, Hunter Road, which is also how the lease area will be accessed. The rest of the poles (5) will require new ground disturbances and clearing of vegetation up to 20 feet around each pole; approximately 0.88 acres of vegetation would potentially be disturbed.

In addition, for non-listed species, Crown Castle and Otero Electric Coop have agreed to adhere to the standard project design features (see Appendix H, 10. Vegetation, pages 9 and 10), which limit(s) disturbance(s) of vegetation to the minimum necessary for the construction of structures and facilities, and re-vegetation stipulations for disturbed areas.

No Action

Under the no action alternative, there would be no impacts to plant species or their habitat beyond the approximately 0.8 acres of surface disturbance previously authorized.

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES

Collectively, “special status species” include those listed as endangered or threatened under either Federal or state law, candidate species for protection under Federal law, or other species of interest. For this analysis, the following regulations have been considered:

 Endangered Species Act (ESA): Provides for the conservation of threatened and endangered plants and animals, and the habitats in which they are found.  Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA): As implemented by Executive Order 13186, directs Federal agencies to act in a way which contributes to the conservation and management of migratory birds and their habitats.  Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act: This act extends additional protection beyond the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to these species, including making disturbance unlawful. This rule was considered in the compilation of this document, but is not discussed further, as these species are not present. Environmental Assessment 3-11

 New Mexico Wildlife Conservation Act: New Mexico does not explicitly adopt Federal endangered species lists, but creates a state-specific list based on “investigations concerning wildlife, other available scientific and commercial data and after consultation with wildlife agencies in other states, appropriate Federal agencies, local and tribal governments and other interested persons and organizations” (NMSA, 1978).

Species afforded protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) and species considered sensitive or other special designations by the BLM and state agencies that may have some potential to occur in Otero County are considered special status species for this EA. An analysis of the state and Federal special status species – including range, habitat, and potential for occurrence in the Proposed Action Area – is presented in Tables 6 and 7. This section assesses and lists the potential for special status species or their habitat to occur in the Proposed Action Area using the following summary descriptions:

 None: no suitable habitat is present or the species is not found within the elevation range of the Proposed Action Area  Unlikely: no documentation of species occurrence; low or marginal habitat quality; outside currently known geographic distribution and/or elevation range of species occurrence; species may pass over or migrate through the Proposed Action Area  Possible: no documentation of species occurrence, but suitable habitat may occur; within the geographic distribution and/or elevation range of species occurrence  Present: species have been documented to occur within the Proposed Action Area

3.4.1 Affected Environment

Threatened & Endangered Species, Critical Habitat, and Migratory Birds

Site reconnaissance was conducted on October 19, 2015 and due to the potential presence of habitat for federally listed plant species – Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri), Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii) – within the proposed Project Action Area, plant surveys were conducted on June 7-8, 2016. The plant survey report developed from this survey can be found in Appendix D. Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti and Sacramento prickly poppy were not observed in any of the survey zones.

The site consists of Pinyon Juniper habitat which is very common in the area. Wildlife activity during the survey was low and no wildlife species including bird species were observed. No activity of habitation within the proposed site was witnessed during the site visit.

Based on the observations made during the site reconnaissance an informal biological assessment was performed for the proposed communications site. The purpose of the assessment was to determine the affected environment at the site and to identify expected effects to biological resources, especially those related to sensitive resources as listed in applicable federal, state, and local policies and plans.

Environmental Assessment 3-12

From this review, the proposed project is not located within any USFWS designated Critical Habitats. Additionally, a threatened and endangered species list was obtained using the U.S Fish and Wildlife Services’ (USFWS) Information for Planning and Conservation system (IPaC), information available from the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON-M), the New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council, and the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department (EMNRD). Effects to animal species are outlined in Tables 6 and 7 below.

Table 7. Threatened and Endangered Species

ESA Status/ Potential for Critical Occurrence Species Taxon Scientific Name Habitat a b Effects c Aplomado Bird Falco femoralis E (Federal None No Effect Falcon and State), XN, MBTA Arctic Bird Falco peregrinus T (State) None No Effect Peregrine tundrius Falcon Baird’s Bird Ammodramus T (State), None No Effect Sparrow bairdii MBTA Bald Eagle Bird Haliaeetus T (State), None No Effect leucocephalus MBTA, BGPA

Bell’s Vireo Bird Vireo bellii T (State), None No Effect MBTA Broad-billed Bird Cynanthus T (State), None No Effect Hummingbird latirostris MBTA Brown Bird Pelecanus E (State), None No Effect Pelican occidentalis MBTA Common Bird Buteogallus T (State), None No Effect Black anthracinus MBTA Hawk Common Bird Columbina E (State), None No Effect Ground-Dove passerina MBTA Elegant Bird Trogon elegans E (State), None No Effect Trogon MBTA Gray-banded Reptile Lampropeltis E (State) None No Effect Kingsnake alterna

Environmental Assessment 3-13

ESA Status/ Potential for Critical Occurrence Species Taxon Scientific Name Habitat a b Effects c Gray Vireo Bird Viero vicinior T (State), Possible No Adverse Effect - MBTA due to the small foot print of the actual disturbance area, and the recommendations from the NMDGF and USFWS to have the construction occur outside the migratory bird breeding season of March 1 through September 15, likelihood of adverse effect to this species is low. Kuenzler’s Plant Echinocereus E, (also Possible No Effect – based on Hedgehog fendleri var. State listed) the habitat type and/or Cactus kuenzleri lack of observed individuals, no effects to the species of concern are anticipated at this time. Least Tern Bird Sternula antillarum E (Federal None No Effect and State), MBTA New Mexico Mamm Zapus hudsonius E (Federal None No Effect Meadow al luteus and State) Jumping Mouse Mexican Bird Strix occidentalis T, MBTA None No Effect Spotted Owl lucida Mottled Rock Reptile Crotalus lepidus T (State) None No Effect Rattlesnake Lepidus Neotropic Bird Phalacrocorax T (State), None No Effect Cormorant brasilianus MBTA Northern Bird Falco femoralis XN None No Effect Aplomado septentrionalis Falcon Penasco Mamm Tamias minimus C, E (State) None No Effect Least al atristriatus Chipmunk Peregrine Bird Falco peregrinus T (State), None No Effect Falcon MBTA

Environmental Assessment 3-14

ESA Status/ Potential for Critical Occurrence Species Taxon Scientific Name Habitat a b Effects c Pinyon Jay Bird Gumnorhinus MBTA Possible No Adverse Effect - cyanocephalus due to the small foot print of the actual disturbance area, and the recommendations from the NMDGF and USFWS to have the construction occur outside the migratory bird breeding season of March 1 through September 15, likelihood of adverse effect to this species is low. Sacramento Amphi Aneides hardii T (State) None No Effect Mountain bian Salamander Sacramento Plant Cirsium vinaceum T None No Effect Mountains Thistle Sacramento Plant Argemone E Possible No Effect - based on Prickly Poppy pleiacantha ssp. the habitat type and/or pinnatisecta lack of observed individuals, no effects to the species of concern are anticipated at this time. Southwestern Bird Empidonax traillii E (Federal None No Effect Wouldow extimus and State) Flycatcher Spotted Bat Mamm Euderma T (State) None No Effect al maculatum Varied Bird Passerina T (State), None No Effect Bunting versicolor MBTA Sprague’s Bird Anthus spragueii C, MBTA None No Effect Pipit

Environmental Assessment 3-15

ESA Status/ Potential for Critical Occurrence Species Taxon Scientific Name Habitat a b Effects c Todsen’s Plant Hedeoma todsenii E, (and Possible No Effect - based on Pennyroyal State listed) the habitat type and/or lack of observed individuals, no effects to the species of concern are anticipated at this time. White-eared Bird Hylocharis leucotis T (State), None No Effect Hummingbird MBTA Wright’s Plant Cirsium wrightii C None No Effect Marsh Thistle Yellow-billed Bird Coccyzus T, MBTA None No Effect Cuckoo americanus Yellow-eyed Bird Junco phaeonotus T (State), None No Effect Junco MBTA Source: USFWS, NMDGF MBTA – species listed under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act BGPA – Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act a ESA status key: - E Endangered - T Threatened - C Candidate - EXPN, XN Experimental population, non-essential - PT Proposed threatened - DCH Designated critical habitat - PCH Proposed critical habitat b Potential for occurrence listed presents the conclusion from the analysis documented in NMDGF’s BISON-M website. c Plant Survey Report is located in Appendix D.

Table 8. USFWS IPaC and NMDGF BISON-M Lists of Migratory Birds with Potential to Occur in Project Area Seasonal Species Scientific Occurrence in Potential for Occurrence Common Name Name Project Area Unlikely. Although low quality habitat Summer (regular, Falco exists, the Proposed Action Area are at Aplomado Falcon historical), winter femoralis higher elevations compared to where the (casual, historical) species are normally found. Ammodramus Baird’s Sparrow Wintering (rare) None. No suitable habitat. bairdii Haliaeetus Wintering Bald Eagle None. No suitable habitat. leucocephalus (uncommon) Bell’s Vireo Vireo bellii Breeding None. No suitable habitat.

Environmental Assessment 3-16

Seasonal Species Scientific Occurrence in Potential for Occurrence Common Name Name Project Area Unlikely. Although low quality habitat Broad-billed Cynanthus exists, the Proposed Action Area are at Breeding Hummingbird latirostris higher elevations compared to where the species are normally found. Pelecanus Fall (vagrant to New Brown Pelican None. No suitable habitat. occidentalis Mexico) Unlikely. Lack of suitable habitat; Common Black Buteogallus however, suitable habitat is present in the Summer (rare) Hawk anthracinus Tularosa Creek near the Proposed Action Area. Unlikely. Although low quality habitat Common Columbina exists, the Proposed Action Area are at Summer (rare) Ground-Dove passerina higher elevations compared to where the species are normally found. Trogon Elegant Trogon Sumer (rare) None. No suitable habitat. elegans Possible. However, due to the small foot print of the actual disturbance area, and the recommendations from the NMDGF and USFWS to have the construction Gray Vireo Vireo vicinior Summer occur outside the migratory bird breeding season of March 1 through September 15, likelihood of adverse effect to this species is low. Sternula Least Tern Summer None. No suitable habitat. antillarum Strix Mexican Spotted occidentalis Year-round None. No suitable habitat. Owl lucida Neotropic Phalacrocorax Year-round None. No suitable habitat. Cormorant brasilianus (uncommon) Falco Peregrine Falcon Varies None. No suitable habitat. peregrinus Passerina Summer (rare to Varied Bunting None. No suitable habitat. versicolor uncommon, vagrant) Anthus Sprague’s Pipit Winter (migrant) None. No suitable habitat. spragueii Unlikely. Although habitat may exist, White-eared Hylocharis occurrences in Otero Co. are rare. The Migrant (rare) Hummingbird leucotis species seems to be mostly occurring in the Animas Mountains in Hidalgo Co.

Environmental Assessment 3-17

Seasonal Species Scientific Occurrence in Potential for Occurrence Common Name Name Project Area Unlikely. Lack of suitable habitat; Yellow-billed Coccyzus however, species occurrences have been Breeding Cuckoo americanus reported approximately 2.2 miles southeast of the Proposed Action Areas. Unlikely. Although low quality habitat Yellow-eyed Junco exists, the species occurrences are Year-round Junco phaeonotus mainly reported in the southwestern corner of New Mexico.

3.4.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

Based on the lack of suitable habitat or specimens observed of the three federally listed species, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri), Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii), there would be no effect to these species.

The project areas occur within relatively undeveloped migratory bird habitat. In addition, the proposed action includes design features and planning to reduce impacts to migratory birds, such as tower placement within minimally sensitive areas, limiting tower height to 199 feet and eliminating the need for guy wires. Additionally, the proposed telecommunications site is not located within a principal migratory bird flyway. As such, the proposed work may temporarily disrupt nesting migratory birds.

No Action

Under the No Action alternative, no migratory birds or nesting migratory birds would be affected because the ROWs would not be authorized and no construction would take place.

Mitigation of Impacts

NMDGF recommendation is for the proposed construction to occur outside of the migratory bird breeding season of March 1 to September 15, to avoid disturbance to nesting migratory birds.

CULTURAL AND HISTORIC RESOURCES

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as amended (16 U.S.C. §§ 470 et seq.), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) implementing regulations (36 CFR Part 800) and the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA) for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission dated September 2004, was referred to determine if the project site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure, or object, significant in American

Environmental Assessment 3-18

history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.

3.5.1 Affected Environment

A Class III (100 percent) archeological survey was completed by Antigua Archaeology, LLC, on March 24, 2016, in the Proposed Action Area. No Cultural Resources were identified during the survey. Please see Appendix E for cultural resources documentation.

Antigua Archaeology, LLC also performed a Class I records search at the NM SHPO. The Class I search did not identify any National Register-eligible or listed Historic Properties within the Proposed Action Area. The search however identified three National Register-ineligible Archaeological Sites within ½ mile of the Proposed Action Area. These sites are detailed in Table 8 below. A Class III cultural resources survey was completed over the Proposed Action Area on March 21, 2016 by archaeologist, Emily Brown, Ph.D.; no archaeological sites, historic properties, or cultural resources were observed.

Documentation of these reviews was submitted to the SHPO via Form 620 on May 19, 2016. The SHPO concurred that the proposed undertaking would have no direct or visual effects on historic properties in a response letter dated June 3, 2016. A copy of the SHPO concurrence letter, Form 620, and associated documents are located in Appendix E.

Table 9. Previously Recorded Cultural Sites Eligible for Listing on the NRHP within the Proposed Action Area and Vicinity National Land Register Ownership/ Probable Eligibility Relative Site No. Description Function (Criterion) Location Status Single-episode, historic-period Private/ outside beyond area proposed trash dump Trash LA183836 Ineligible Proposed Action for disturbance under the consisting of a dump Area private action scatter of domestic trash Private/ outside proximate to planned Historic, possibly Not formally LA112744 Proposed Action power line route under Apache area evaluated Area the private action Prehistoric Native American Private/ outside proximate to planned Not formally LA18230 site with no Proposed Action power line route under evaluated associated Area the private action features Sources: (Luchetta, Moses, and Brown, 2016)

Environmental Assessment 3-19

3.5.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

Under the proposed action and connected non-federal action, there are no cultural resource sites with a NRHP status of listed, eligible, or recommended as eligible. Antigua (2016) concludes that the two historic sites referenced above have not been formally evaluated in terms of National Register criteria, and are therefore not considered historic properties. Therefore no effects to cultural sites would occur from the proposed action or connected non-federal action. The associated documents can be found in Appendix E.

No Action

Under the no action alternative, no disturbance to cultural resources would occur beyond what has been previously authorized.

LANDS AND REALTY

3.6.1 Affected Environment Figure 3. Map to show the proposed action and the existing Tri-State transmission line. An existing Tri-State Generation and Transmissions Association’s (Tri-State) Access Road Blazer-Tularosa 115kV transmission lines Powerline would be crossed by the proposed Otero BLM managed County Electric Cooperatives’ utility poles lands installations. Portions of the existing access road and utility right-of-way would also intersect the BLM ROW area.

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

The proposed aerial utility right-of-way would intersect the existing Tri-State transmission lines at two locations, which is shown in the figure to the right. The height of utility poles and its overhead lines would be lower than the existing Tri-State transmission lines, but would not interfere Existing Tri-State triple poles or conflict with the existing transmission overhead transmission lines lines because the proposed aerial poles would be placed in accordance with Tri- State height/clearance requirements.

Environmental Assessment 3-20

No Action

Under the no action alternative, no additional utility structures installation would occur; therefore the existing transmission lines would not be affected.

AIR QUALITY AND NOISE

3.7.1 Affected Environment

The proposed action areas mainly occur within undeveloped habitats, where no other artificial noise or air pollutants would be occurring.

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

The proposed construction process of the telecommunication facility and utility poles would emit some air pollutants and noise. A back-up generator is proposed to be installed, however as the power and telecommunications would be provided via proposed overhead utility poles; there would not be excessive noise once the construction is complete. The generator also does not emit any pollutants, and as no other equipment emitting noise or pollutants is proposed, the tower, associated equipment, and utility poles are not expected to affect the air quality or noise within or adjacent to proposed project areas.

No Action

Under the no action alternative, air quality and noise level in the environment would not be affected, as no artificial noise or air pollutant would be introduced to the environment.

VISUAL RESOURCES

3.8.1 Affected Environment

The project area is north of Tularosa Creek and west of the Mescalero Apache Indian Reservation near Bent, NM in a landscape of steep-sided ridges that run east to west. The project area is within the viewshed of US 70, a major highway to the Mescalero Apache Reservation, Ruidoso, the Lincoln National Forest, and Roswell. The dominant vegetation is pinyon/juniper with a grass understory. The vegetation is mostly dark green and ranges from medium to coarse in texture. There are few built elements in the landscape; a road and a fence. The area is used primarily by recreationists. Those using the area for recreation are typically engaged in scenic touring, hiking, OHV activities, and photography. This range of individuals defines the casual observer. The project area is within VRI Class III, Scenic Quality B, Moderate Sensitivity, and within the Foreground/Middleground Distance Zone.

The proposed rights-of-way would follow an existing road across BLM-managed land.

The public land portion of the project area is a Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class II area. The VRM Class II objective is to retain the existing character of the landscape. The level of

Environmental Assessment 3-21

changes to the characteristic landscape should be low. Management activities may be seen, but should not attract the attention of the casual observer. Any changes should repeat the basic elements of form, line, color, and texture found in the predominant natural features of the characteristic landscape.

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

The proposed action would introduce a secondary feature parallel to existing curving band (road). The new feature (power line) would introduce additional dark-brown vertical elements into the landscape. Much of the new power line would be screened from viewers along U.S. 70 by low hills along the highway, but would be visible from the eastern Bent exit.

The proposed action would meet the VRM Class II objectives.

No Action

Under the no action alternative, visual resources in the environment would not be affected.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

3.9.1 Affected Environment

Environmental Justice involves the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socio-economic group should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of Federal, state, local, and Tribal programs and policies. Executive Order 12898, issued in 1994, requires that “. . . each Federal agency would make achieving Environmental Justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income populations.”

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences

Proposed Action

No disproportionately high or adverse human health or environmental effects are anticipated to low income or minority populations from the proposed construction of the new telecommunications facility and associated utility poles. In addition, the local community, including members of the Mescalero Indian Tribe, would benefit from enhanced communication capability. The tower would also increase the capacity and range of emergency services communications, benefitting the local communities as well as travelers. Therefore it can be determined that the Proposed Action would have a positive effect on environmental justice in the neighboring communities.

Environmental Assessment 3-22

No Action

Under the no action alternative, there would be a potentially negative effect to the environmental justice in the neighboring communities, including the Mescalero Indian Tribe, as they would not benefit from enhanced communication capability. There would also be no increase of emergency services network, negatively impacting the local communities and travelers.

4.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

METHODOLOGY

Cumulative impact, as defined by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ; 40 CFR 1508.7), is:

…the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non‐Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.

The direct and indirect effects of the proposed action and connected non-federal action have been summarized in Chapter 3.0. The objective of the cumulative effects analysis is to estimate the resulting impact of the project when viewed within the context of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within the vicinity of the project. Four steps were taken to conduct this analysis:

 Identify cumulative effects issues  Identify the temporal and spatial extent of the study area for each resource area  Identify past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions relevant to each issue  Analyze cumulative effects

4.1.1 Identification of Cumulative Effect Issues

Cumulative effect issue identified is the new ground disturbance that would take place for the purposes of installing the telecommunications facility and utility poles and the operation of the telecommunication facility once construction is complete.

4.1.2 Geographic and Temporal Boundaries

Issues carried forward into cumulative effects analysis include vegetation, wildlife species, special status species, and migratory birds. The cumulative effects analysis evaluates past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions within the Proposed Action Area. The geographic boundary for this analysis is shown in Figure 4 to the left in relation to the Proposed Action Area.

Timeframes are also considered for the cumulative effects analysis. The actual time period of construction would vary depending on difficulty of construction and other factors. The tower and

Environmental Assessment 4-23

associated equipment would be visited by maintenance personnel periodically as long as the tower is in operation.

Parcels on and surrounding the Proposed Action Area are used primarily as rangelands and are largely undeveloped. The existing access road, Hunter Road was developed between 1996 and 2004. Between 2006 and 2009, portions of the parcels, including the proposed telecommunications facility site, were cleared. In addition, Tri-State transmission lines were installed during the same time period. No other major undertaking took place in the past on and surrounding the Proposed Action Areas.

No new development, other than the operation of the proposed telecommunications facility once construction is complete, is proposed surrounding the Proposed Action Areas in the reasonably foreseeable future.

Figure 4. Geographic boundary considered for the cumulative 4.1.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis affects analysis. Proposed Action

Proposed Action Area The biological resources depend on Access Road naturally vegetated habitats for their Powerline viability. The low level of existing disturbance to natural landscapes within the Proposed Action Area, coupled with the fact that once construction is complete very little activities would occur within the Proposed Action Area, argues for a high level of habitat preservation within the project site in the reasonably foreseeable future. Additionally, there is a low likelihood of substantial land development within the reasonably foreseeable future given the stagnant population growth in the vicinity. Each of the identified issues is discussed below.

VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE HABITAT As summarized in Chapter 3.3.2.1, approximately 0.8 acres of previously private lands would be directly impacted by the proposed action/connected non- federal action, as compared to the no action alternative. As listed in Chapter 3.3, vegetation and habitat types throughout the Proposed Action Area indicates that they are common, with the occurrence within the project site including evergreen junipers and pinyon pines. The area of vegetation lost from past and present development within the Proposed Action Area comprises less than 11 Environmental Assessment 4-24

percent of the total land area. The proposed action and connected non-federal action would result in a negligible reduction of the available native vegetation and habitat in the Proposed Action Area. Once construction is complete, activities within the Proposed Action Area would be minimal; the tower and equipment site would be visited by maintenance personnel approximately once a year to ensure the tower and equipment are functioning properly. Cumulatively, once construction is complete, no further disturbance to the areas surrounding the utility poles and the proposed tower/equipment lease area are expected to occur, with the exception of the occasional use of the existing access road and Hunter Road.

WILDLIFE SPECIES Road use under either alternative would expect to have minimal wildlife mortality associated with project-related vehicle activities, nor would it be expected to result in adverse cumulative effects. Cumulative impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions in conjunction with the proposed action and connected non-federal action would be unlikely to adversely affect wildlife and wildlife habitat in the Proposed Action Area.

SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES Special status species were reviewed for their potential to occur in the project area. As outlined in Chapter 3.4, this includes special status species such as those listed as endangered or threatened under either Federal or state law, candidate species for protection under Federal law, or other species of interest. Based on the lack of suitable habitat or specimens observed of the three federally listed species, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri), Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii), there would be no effect to these species, and therefore no cumulative effect.

MIGRATORY BIRDS As discussed in Chapter 3.4, potential habitat may be present for several of the migratory bird species listed under federal and state agencies.

The proposed Site and design process for this project could not conform to all the USFWS recommendations to decrease potential effects on migratory birds. The proposed Site is not located within a principal migratory bird flyway. Based upon the efforts undertaken during this EA as well as the current data made available, it has been determined that this project would have a minimal effect on migratory birds; however, the presence of migratory birds cannot be ruled out.

The proposed action and connected non-federal action and other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions are unlikely to adversely affect migratory birds.

No Action

Under the No Action alternative, there would be no cumulative impacts to vegetation, wildlife species, special status species, and migratory birds because the ROWs would not be authorized and would therefore not contribute to any other actions that may affect the resources.

Environmental Assessment 4-25

5.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION

Correspondences from the Otero Electric Coop and Tri-State Transmission and Generation are included in Appendix B.

The USFWS, NMDGF, and EMNRD were consulted for potential impacts the proposed project may have on the listed species, which occurred between December 16, 2015, and October 10, 2016. Copies of the correspondence is in located Appendix D.

Consultation for cultural and historic resources with the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office/Officer (SHPO) occurred between May 19, 2016 and June 3, 2016. A copy of the SHPO concurrence letter, Form 620, and associated documents are located in Appendix E.

On July 28, 2015, project information was submitted through the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) to the FCC who initiated contact with the tribes on July 31, 2015. As of January 20, 2016, all tribes have confirmed clearance either directly or by default via the FCC referral process. It was determined that the subject Property is not located on or near a Native American Religious or Sacred Site. However, if archaeological remains or resources are unearthed during construction activities, the operator would stop construction and notify the authorized officer immediately. Tribal consultation documentation and associated correspondence are located in Appendix F.

The following tribes have requested to be notified in the event of an unanticipated discovery: Pueblo of Isleta, Pueblo of Laguna, Pueblo of Tesuque, Ramah Navajo Chapter, Apache Tribe of Oklahoma, Eastern Shoshone Tribe, and Mescalero Apache Tribe.

6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS

Table 10. Trileaf (Consultant) Preparers Role/Discipline Name Site Visitor Matt Kiviko, Patricia Rees, Dena Whitaker Project Scientist Patricia Rees Project Scientist, Report Preparer Dena Whitaker Archaeologist James Moses Archaeologist, Principal Investigator Sarah Luchetta Michelle Ogburn Project Managers, Quality Assurance Elizabeth Shule Meaghan Austin

Environmental Assessment 6-26

Table 11. BLM Reviewers Role/Discipline Name Realty Specialist (Project Lead) Anthony Hom Planning and Environmental Coordinator Ikumi Doucette Rangeland Management Specialist Chris Hitsman Archaeologist Matthew Punke Soil and Air Specialist Gordon Michaud Outdoor Recreation Planner Evelyn Treiman Wildlife Biologist Cody Howard Botanist Patrick Alexander Hydrologist Corey Durr

7.0 REFERENCES

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). (2015). Indian Reservations in the Continental United States. [Map] (Scale: 1:2,000,000, subsequently adjusted by the Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies to a scale of 1:5845860). “Indian Reservations- BIA/CAST 5/96”. https://www.nps.gov/Nagpra/DOCUMENTS/ResMAP.HTM Clark, B. (n.d.). Convert Coordinates - Calculate a position in a variety of formats. Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://www.earthpoint.us Clark, B. (n.d.). Township and Range - Search By Latitude and Longitude. Retrieved July 23, 2015, from http://www.earthpoint.us DeLorme Topo North America 10.0. (2013) [software]. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx Luchetta, S. M.A., Moses, J., Brown, E. Ph.D. (2016). A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Crown Castle Coyote Canyon Located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico. (NMCRIS No. 135465). Prescott, Arizona: Antigua Archaeology, LLC. National Parks Services (NPS). (2010). National Trails System Map. [Map]. https://www.nps.gov/nts/maps.html NatureServe Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia of Life. (2009, February 2). Retrieved from http://explorer.natureserve.org/ New Mexico Department of Game & Fish (NMDGF) - Natural Heritage, Biota Information System of New Mexico - Find a Species Booklet. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.bison-m.org/, New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council - New Mexico Rare Plants. (2001). Retrieved January, 2016, from http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/ State of California Board of Forestry’s Estimated Surface Soil Erosion Hazard Form RM-87 (4/84) U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service – Web Soil Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved July 22, 2015, from USFWS. (2004). National Wildlife Refuge System. [Map]. https://www.fws.gov/refuges/maps/

Environmental Assessment 7-27

USFWS. (n.d.) National Wildlife Refuge System - Four Flyways. [Map]. https://www.fws.gov/refuges/refugeupdate/marapr_2012/fourflyways.html USFWS. (n.d.) Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat online mapper. Retrieved July 23, 2015, and October 20, 2016, from https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe098 93cf75b8dbfb77 USFWS. (n.d.). IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation. Retrieved July 23, 2015 and January 11, 2016, from https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ USFWS; National Wetlands Inventory; National Standards and Support Team. (n.d.). National Wetlands Inventory - surface waters and wetlands. Retrieved November 15, 2015, from https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html

Environmental Assessment 7-28 Appendix A Site Plans and Maps

Bureau of Land Management Surface Management Status Topographic Map  New Mexico - Ruidoso North

Tower Location

Access/Pole Line Utility Easement BLM Managed Areas

BLM – Surface Management Status Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

Site Location & Surrounding Properties

Access Easement Site Location Pole line utility easement Aerial Photographs Crown Castle Aerial Photograph COYOTE CANYON 2016 North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

Mescalero Quadrangle, New Mexico (DeLorme 1982) Contour Interval = 40 Feet Scale 1 Inch = ~2,000 Feet  Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” Longitude: -105° 50’ 52.052” Township: 13S Range: 11E Section: 14 North

Site Location

USGS Topographic Map – Location Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

COYOTE CANYON

November 15, 2015

This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. User Remarks: Soil Map—Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties (Coyote Canyon) 105° 51' 25'' W 25'' 51' 105° W 39'' 49' 105°

420300 420700 421100 421500 421900 422300 422700 33° 11' 19'' N 33° 11' 19'' N 3672300 3672300 3671900 3671900 3671500 3671500 3671100 3671100 3670700 3670700 3670300 3670300 3669900 3669900 3669500 3669500 3669100 3669100

33° 9' 22'' N 33° 9' 22'' N 420300 420700 421100 421500 421900 422300 422700

Map Scale: 1:17,600 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters N 0 250 500 1000 1500 105° 51' 25'' W 25'' 51' 105° W 39'' 49' 105° Feet 0 500 1000 2000 3000 Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 13N WGS84

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 Soil Map—Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties (Coyote Canyon)

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION

Area of Interest (AOI) Spoil Area The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Area of Interest (AOI) Stony Spot Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map Soils measurements. Very Stony Spot Soil Map Unit Polygons Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Wet Spot Soil Map Unit Lines Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov Other Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Soil Map Unit Points Special Line Features Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator Special Point Features projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts Water Features Blowout distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Streams and Canals Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate Borrow Pit Transportation calculations of distance or area are required. Clay Spot Rails This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of Closed Depression the version date(s) listed below. Interstate Highways Gravel Pit US Routes Soil Survey Area: Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties Gravelly Spot Major Roads Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 26, 2014 Landfill Local Roads Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 Lava Flow or larger. Background Marsh or swamp Aerial Photography Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Apr 21, 2011—Apr 22, 2011 Mine or Quarry The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were Miscellaneous Water compiled and digitized probably differs from the background Perennial Water imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Rock Outcrop

Saline Spot

Sandy Spot

Severely Eroded Spot

Sinkhole

Slide or Slip

Sodic Spot

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Soil Map—Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties Coyote Canyon

Map Unit Legend

Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties (NM646)

Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI DSF Deama-Rock outcrop- 777.4 61.5% Holloman variant complex, 15 to 65 percent slopes PAE Pena-Aztec variant association, 486.6 38.5% strongly sloping Totals for Area of Interest 1,264.0 100.0%

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Map Unit Description: Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex, 15 to 65 percent slopes--- Coyote Canyon Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

DSF—Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex, 15 to 65 percent slopes

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: pbfj Elevation: 4,500 to 6,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 16 inches Mean annual air temperature: 49 to 53 degrees F Frost-free period: 110 to 180 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Deama and similar soils: 40 percent Rock outcrop: 20 percent Holloman variant and similar soils: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Deama Setting Landform: Ridges, mountains Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope, toeslope, footslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, center third of mountainflank, side slope, crest Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Fine-loamy alluvium derived from limestone and/or colluvium derived from limestone Typical profile H1 - 0 to 14 inches: very gravelly loam H2 - 14 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 65 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 6 to 20 inches to lithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Very high Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 60 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 Map Unit Description: Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex, 15 to 65 percent slopes--- Coyote Canyon Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 1.0 Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 1.0 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Limestone Hills (R070DY151NM)

Description of Rock Outcrop Setting Landform: Hills Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder, backslope Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, crest Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Limestone Typical profile H1 - 0 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Depth to restrictive feature: 0 to 1 inches to lithic bedrock Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to moderately low (0.00 to 0.06 in/hr) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8s

Description of Holloman Variant Setting Landform: Mountains, ridges Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope, footslope, backslope, shoulder, summit Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, lower third of mountainflank, center third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Convex Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Gypsiferous eolian deposits and/or gypsiferous residuum Typical profile H1 - 0 to 12 inches: gravelly loam H2 - 12 to 60 inches: bedrock Properties and qualities Slope: 15 to 50 percent Depth to restrictive feature: 8 to 20 inches to paralithic bedrock Natural drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained Runoff class: High Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Map Unit Description: Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex, 15 to 65 percent slopes--- Coyote Canyon Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Gypsum, maximum in profile: 55 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 1.0 Available water storage in profile: Very low (about 1.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: D Ecological site: Limestone Hills (R070DY151NM) Data Source Information

Soil Survey Area: Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 26, 2014

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Map Unit Description: Pena-Aztec variant association, strongly sloping---Otero Area, New Coyote Canyon Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

PAE—Pena-Aztec variant association, strongly sloping

Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: pbgt Elevation: 5,000 to 6,500 feet Mean annual precipitation: 13 to 17 inches Mean annual air temperature: 53 to 57 degrees F Frost-free period: 140 to 170 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland

Map Unit Composition Pena and similar soils: 50 percent Aztec variant and similar soils: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Pena Setting Landform: Fan piedmonts Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Mixed gravelly alluvium Typical profile H1 - 0 to 7 inches: loam H2 - 7 to 16 inches: gravelly loam H3 - 16 to 60 inches: very gravelly loam Properties and qualities Slope: 9 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Medium Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 1.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 2 Map Unit Description: Pena-Aztec variant association, strongly sloping---Otero Area, New Coyote Canyon Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties

Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Gravelly (R070DY156NM)

Description of Aztec Variant Setting Landform: Fan piedmonts, ridges Landform position (three-dimensional): Rise Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Convex Parent material: Mixed gravelly alluvium and/or gypsiferous eolian deposits Typical profile H1 - 0 to 8 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam H2 - 8 to 31 inches: very gravelly gypsiferous sandy loam H3 - 31 to 60 inches: very gravelly gypsiferous sandy loam Properties and qualities Slope: 9 to 15 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Runoff class: Low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (2.00 to 6.00 in/hr) Depth to water table: More than 80 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 40 percent Gypsum, maximum in profile: 40 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Very slightly saline to slightly saline (2.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 1.0 Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e Hydrologic Soil Group: A Ecological site: Limestone Hills (R070DY151NM) Data Source Information

Soil Survey Area: Otero Area, New Mexico, Parts of Otero, Eddy and Chaves Counties Survey Area Data: Version 11, Sep 26, 2014

Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 5/16/2016 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 2

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

National Wildlife Refuge System Map  North

Site Location

USFWS – Wildlife Refuge Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON North of 12 Hunter Road

Bent, NM 88314

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Critical Habitat Map  North

Site Location

USFWS – Critical Habitat Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

North American Migration Flyways  North

Site Location

Migratory Bird Flyways – Location Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

National Park Service

National Historic Trails and Scenic Routes  North

Site Location

National Park Service – Trails and Routes Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

Bureau of Indian Affairs

Indian Reservation Map  North

Site Location

Site Location

Bureau of Indian Affairs – Reservation Map Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON

North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

Appendix B Utility Structures Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. Correspondence Dena Whitaker

From: Miller, Curtis Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 12:27 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: RE: Proposed Cell Tower & Utility ROW Attachments: Future Otero Line Crossings.pdf

Hi Dena,

Attached I have sketched the proposed Otero line route relative to Tri‐State’s Blazer‐Tularosa 115kV Transmission Line and structure locations. All we ask is that Otero coordinate with Tri‐State on the distribution line design and construction at the crossing locations. Answers to your bullet points are in red below:

 Do you think the proposed utility poles installations would affect the existing transmission lines? – No impacts to the Tri-State transmission line are expected.  Would the overhead lines from the proposed utility poles affect the transmission lines? – No impacts are expected, but Tri-State requests the design be coordinated so that the crossing can be kept on record and evaluated in further detail.  Have you been notified by Crown Castle or Otero Electric regarding their proposed work? – Not to my knowledge

Please let me know if you need anything else, or if this these answers will suffice.

Thanks,

Curtis B. Miller Transmission Siting & Environmental Planner Tri‐State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. 1100 W. 116th Ave. | Westminster, CO 80234 Cell: 303.358.6473 | Office: 720.872.7046

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 12:49 PM To: Miller, Curtis Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed Cell Tower & Utility ROW

Hi Curtis,

Thank you for speaking with me on the phone this morning regarding the proposed cell tower and its utility ROW.

To recap, Trileaf is responsible for completing the BLM Environmental Assessment (EA) report for the proposed telecommunications site and the proposed utility poles installations in Bent, NM. After the BLM reviewed the initial draft EA, they asked we also input the potential effect the proposed project may have on the existing Tri-State transmission lines, as well as more details on the structures of the proposed utility poles.

I have attached the google earth snip it for visual reference (green line=Tri-State transmission lines, red=access easement, proposed blue=pole line utility easement, orange=BLM land).

North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 33.183128595, -105.847792104

 Do you think the proposed utility poles installations would affect the existing transmission lines?  Would the overhead lines from the proposed utility poles affect the transmission lines?  Have you been notified by Crown Castle or Otero Electric regarding their proposed work?

1

If you could provide a bit more information on the transmission lines, and its relation to the proposed utility pole installations that would great.

I have contacted the Otero Electric Co-op to obtain the proposed pole structure info, pending their response.

Please let me know if you need more information to better assist you with my questions.

Thank you,

Dena Whitaker Senior Environmental Biologist

2121 W. Chandler Blvd., Suite 203 Chandler, AZ 85224 Phone: (480) 850-0575 Fax: (480) 850-0578

2 Otero County Electric Cooperative, Inc. Correspondences Dena Whitaker

From: Lance Wright Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 9:02 AM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: RE: Utility Poles Installation, Bent, NM (Coyote Canyon)

Dena, The pole heights will be vary. We will be using 30’ to 45’ poles, each will be buried 10% of the length plus 2’. They all should be wooden poles. Please let me know if you need anything else.

Sincerely,

Lance Wright Staking Department Supervisor Otero County Electric Cooperative PO Box 227 Cloudcroft, New Mexico 88317

Phone 575-682-2521 Fax 575-682-3109 [email protected]

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 4:53 PM To: Lance Wright Subject: RE: Utility Poles Installation, Bent, NM (Coyote Canyon)

Hello again,

Just one more thing. Do you happen to have more information on the poles itself, such as materials and height of the poles? The BLM was asking for that information on top of their effect on existing transmission lines.

I think the height and material should be sufficient for BLM.

Thank you,

Dena Whitaker Senior Project Scientist Trileaf Corporation (480) 850-0575

From: Dena Whitaker Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 3:11 PM To: 'Lance Wright' Subject: RE: Utility Poles Installation, Bent, NM (Coyote Canyon)

Hi Lance,

No worries. I called the office and I was told you are out of the office until tomorrow.

Thank you for getting back to me with that information. I will incorporate this into my report that will go out to the BLM.

1 Thank you again for your time and assistance.

Have a great rest of the week!

Dena Whitaker Senior Project Scientist Trileaf Corporation (480) 850-0575

From: Lance Wright [mailto:lancew@ote‐coop.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 3:09 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: RE: Utility Poles Installation, Bent, NM (Coyote Canyon)

Dena, I’m sorry it has taken so long to reply I have been out of state the last couple of weeks. As for the new distribution line I see not negative impacts to the existing transmission line we will be crossing underneath the transmission with plenty of separation between the lines and still maintaining required clearance above the ground. Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Sincerely,

Lance Wright Staking Department Supervisor Otero County Electric Cooperative PO Box 227 Cloudcroft, New Mexico 88317

Phone 575-682-2521 Fax 575-682-3109 [email protected]

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017 8:48 AM To: lancew@ote‐coop.com Subject: Utility Poles Installation, Bent, NM (Coyote Canyon)

Hi Lance,

Thank you for speaking with me on the phone yesterday regarding the installations of utility poles in Bent, NM.

I am writing an environmental report for the BLM, and they asked I also take into consideration of the possible effect the proposed installation of the utility poles would have on the existing Tri-State transmission lines. Below is information I will need to include in the report.

 Information on the structure of the proposed utility poles (height, exterior material, etc.).  How the proposed utility poles would not negatively affect the existing transmission lines (and where it intersects).

I have also attached a response I received from Tri-State Generation and Transmission.

Thank you for your time and assistance,

Dena Whitaker Senior Environmental Biologist

2 2121 W. Chandler Blvd., Suite 203 Chandler, AZ 85224 Phone: (480) 850-0575 Fax: (480) 850-0578

3 Appendix C Site Photographs

Site Photograph 1 – Looking north at the Site

Site Photograph 2 – Looking south at the Site

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 3 – Looking east at the Site

Site Photograph 4 – Looking west at the Site

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 5 – Looking north away from the Site

Site Photograph 6 – Looking south away from the Site

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 7 – Looking east away from the Site

Site Photograph 8 – Looking west away from the Site

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 9 – Looking south along the access easement

Site Photograph 10 – Looking east along easement B

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 11 – Looking west along easement B

Site Photograph 12 – Looking west along easement C

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 13 – Looking west along easement D

Site Photograph 14 – Lease area facing north

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 15 – Lease area facing south

Site Photograph 16 – Segment 1

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 17 – Segment 3

Site Photograph 18 – Segment 5

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Site Photograph 19 – Segment 5

Site Photograph 20 – Segment 5

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon October 19, 2015 North of 12 Hunter Road & Bent, NM 88314 June 7-8, 2016

Appendix D Natural Resources

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

December 16, 2015

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NEW MEXICO ECOLOGICAL SERVICES FIELD OFFICE 2105 OSUNA ROAD NE ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113 PHONE: (505) 761-4738 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

To whom it may concern,

Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). A site location map, photos and a biological survey of the site are enclosed to assist you in your review.

Our investigation includes determining if any of the following special resource areas are located at the site. 1. Is the site located in or on a wilderness area or wildlife preserve? 2. Is the site located within an area sensitive to migratory birds? 3. Is the site located in or on a designated critical habitat? 4. Does the site sustain any species of plant or animal life that is designated or proposed as threatened or endangered?

Based on the efforts undertaken during our IBA, project specifications and the current data made available, we have concluded that there may be potential for the proposed project to have an effect on several threatened and endangered species and migratory birds.

Trileaf is requesting a review from the USFWS for effects to threatened and endangered species, critical habitat, or other special resources. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

December 16, 2015

NEW MEXICO EPARTMENT OF GAME AND FISH ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIVISION ATTN: Mr. Matt Wunder – Chief of Conservation Services PO Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 (505) 476-8101 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Mr. Wunder,

Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). A site location map, photos and a biological survey of the site are enclosed to assist you in your review.

Our investigation includes determining if any of the following special resource areas are located at the site. 1. Is the site located in or on a wilderness area or wildlife preserve? 2. Is the site located within an area sensitive to migratory birds? 3. Is the site located in or on a designated critical habitat? 4. Does the site sustain any species of plant or animal life that is designated or proposed as threatened or endangered?

Based on the efforts undertaken during our IBA, project specifications and the current data made available, we have concluded that there may be potential for the proposed project to have an effect on several threatened and endangered species and migratory birds.

Trileaf is requesting a review from NMDGF for effects to threatened and endangered species, critical habitat, or other special resources. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

Informal Biological Assessment Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon / BU #821945 - Trileaf #619424 Latitude: 33-10-59.263 N; Longitude: 105-50-52.052 W

Trileaf performed an Informal Biological Assessment for the subject site. The purpose is to document whether the proposed undertaking will affect listed or proposed threatened or endangered species, designated critical habitats, wetlands, and migratory birds. A project description, site photographs and topographical site location maps are included in this report.

Proposed Project Description: The Site is located north of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, NM 88314, and consists of the construction of a 195-foot Monopole Communications Tower, not to exceed 199 feet. The proposed tower will be within a 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square foot) lease area. In addition, the project includes a 20-foot wide access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with U.S. Highway 70. The proposed tower site is approximately 7,344 feet above mean sea level.

Site and Surrounding Habitat: The Site is currently located within an undeveloped land. During the area reconnaissance, no trees along the access road, and generally throughout the area were identified to be removed.

The surrounding habitat within a 0.5 mile radius of the proposed site consists predominantly of Madrean Lower Montane Woodlands. To the north is grassland with sparse tree growth, followed by an existing access road, followed by mixed grasslands and woodlands. To the east is mixed woodlands and grasslands, followed by Hunter Road, followed by mixed woodlands and grasslands. To the south is predominantly woodlands. To the west is mixed grasslands and woodlands. The current habitat is not mapped as critical habitat, however, the lease area and easement may provide potential habitat for several listed species. The proposed access and utility easement south of the project area parallels Hunter Road. Approximately 100 to 400 feet east of Hunter Road lies ephemeral streams. Habitat along these streams may also be considered potential habitat for listed species as well as provide habitat for migratory birds.

Wetlands: Trileaf has reviewed the topographic map, soil composition, as well as the National Wetlands Inventory Map to determine if the proposed lease area and easements would have an impact on any wetlands or require significant amounts of fill or grading. Trileaf determined that the site is not located in a recognized national wetland area.

Trileaf performed a field visit and identified surface water bodies. Using local maps in combination with an area reconnaissance the following water bodies have been identified in the table below:

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Water Body Direction from Distance from Water Body Type Name Tower Tower Ephemeral Stream Unnamed SE 0.40 miles Ephemeral Stream Unnamed ESE 0.43 miles Seasonal Wash Unnamed SSE 1.00 miles Creek Tularosa Creek S 1.60 miles Freshwater Pond Unnamed SSW 1.77 miles (Agricultural) Freshwater Pond Unnamed S 1.83 miles (Agricultural) Freshwater Pond Unnamed SSW 2.10 miles (Agricultural)

Migratory Birds: The proposed Site and design process for this project could not conform to all the USFWS recommendations to decrease potential effects on migratory birds. Therefore, it has included mitigating factors such as tower placement within minimally sensitive areas, avoiding placement near wetlands and large water bodies, limiting tower height to 199 feet, and eliminating the need for guy wires. While the proposed Site is located near the Central flyway, our site investigation has determined that the project area is not located in an NWI mapped wetland, waterway, wildlife refuge, national wilderness area, forest area, ridge-line, coastline or area commonly known to have high incidences of fog or low clouds, where migratory birds may be found. Based upon the efforts undertaken during this IBA as well as the current data made available, we have concluded that this project will not have a significant effect on migratory birds; however, the presence of migratory birds cannot be ruled out.

Soils: According to the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Otero County, New Mexico, the Site is underlain by Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex with a 15 to 65 percent slopes. The complex composition consists of 40 percent Deama and similar soils with 15 to 65 percent slopes, 20 percent rock outcrop, and 15 percent Holloman variant and similar soils with 15 to 50 percent slopes.

Deama soils consists of well drained soils that are formed from fine-loamy alluvium derived from limestone and/or colluvium derived from limestone and are found in summits, shoulders, backslopes, toeslopes, and footslopes of ridges and mountains. The depth to the most restrictive feature is 6 to 20 inches. The depth to the water table is more than 80 inches. A typical profile of Deama soils consists of a surface layer of very gravelly loam extending from 0 to 14 inches, and bedrock extending from 14 to 60 inches. Deama soils have no frequency of flooding or ponding.

Rock outcrop are formed from limestone and are found in summits, shoulders, and backslopes of hills. The depth to the most restrictive feature is 0 to 1 inches to lithic bedrock. A typical profile of rock outcrop consists of a layer of bedrock extending from 0 to 60 inches. Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Holloman soils consists of somewhat excessively drained soils that are formed from gypsiferous eolian deposits and/or gypsiferous residuum and are found in toeslopes, footslopes, backslopes, shoulders, and summits of mountains and ridges. The depth to the most restrictive feature is 8 to 20 inches. The depth to the water table is more than 80 inches. A typical profile of Holloman soils consists of a surface layer of gravelly loam extending from 0 to 12 inches, and bedrock extending from 12 to 60 inches. Holloman soils have no frequency of flooding or ponding. Deama-Rock outcrop-Holloman variant complex, with a 15 to 65 percent slopes, is not considered a hydric soil, and no hydrophytic vegetation or surface water was observed.

Threatened or Endangered Species: Trileaf has researched the listed or proposed threatened or endangered species and designated critical habitat for the project area. This includes any such species that have been reported to exist within the state where the project is located. The list of federally threatened or endangered species was acquired through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Information, Planning, and Consultation system (IPaC). The state list of threatened or endangered species was acquired from New Mexico Department of Game & Fish’s Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON-M) and is broken down by county. The lease area is not located within an aquatic environment; therefore any obligate aquatic species should not be directly impacted by this project and are not included in the table below. A list of remaining species and site observations are summarized in the following table:

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Range of open Federal/State habitats: savanna, – scrubland, grassland, Habitat assessment Aplomado Falcon Endangered, cactus desert, indicated no No Effect (Falco femoralis) Migratory marshland. Inhabits a potential for habitat Bird Treaty range of altitudes from present Act lowlands to high- altitude areas

Breeds in arctic Arctic Peregrine tundra, and inhabits Habitat assessment Falcon State - coastlines and indicated no No Effect (Falco peregrinus Threatened mountains from potential for habitat tundrius) Florida to South present America in Winter

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Un-grazed or lightly grazed mixed-grass prairie; areas with scattered low bushes and matted vegetation, State – in New Mexico, Habitat assessment Baird’s Sparrow Threatened, ranges from desert indicated no (Ammodramus Migratory No Effect grasslands in the south potential for habitat bairdii) Bird Treaty to prairies in the present Act northeast and mountain meadows in the San Juan and Sangre de Cristo mountains

State – Threatened, Bald and Golden Conifer and hardwood Habitat assessment Bald Eagle Eagle forests, large trees or indicated no (Haliaeetus No Effect Protection cliffs near water with potential for habitat leucocephalus) Act, abundant prey present Migratory Bird Treaty Act

Lowland riparian areas with willows, State – mesquite, and Habitat assessment Threatened, Bell’s Vireo seepwillows, prefers indicated no Migratory No Effect (Vireo bellii) dense, low, shrubby potential for habitat Bird Treaty vegetation in riparian present Act areas, open canopy or second-growth areas

Riparian woodlands at State – Broad-billed low to moderate Habitat assessment Threatened, Hummingbird elevation. In New indicated no Migratory No Effect (Cynanthus Mexico, nest primarily potential for habitat Bird Treaty latrirostris) in hackberry thickets present Act and similar vegetation

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Live along the coast; State – found on rocky, sandy Habitat assessment Brown Pelican Endangered, or vegetated offshore indicated no (Pelecanus Migratory islands, beaches, No Effect potential for habitat occidentalis) Bird Treaty harbors, marinas, present Act estuaries and breakwaters

Lowland forest, State – Common Black swamps and Habitat assessment Threatened, Hawk mangroves, moist and indicated no Migratory No Effect (Buteogallus arid habitats but often potential for habitat Bird Treaty anthracinus) near water; woodlands present Act with cottonwood trees

Native shrublands and weedy areas, dessert riparian deciduous State – woodland especially Common Ground- Habitat assessment Endangered, of cottonwoods, Dove indicated no Migratory marsh, where desert No Effect (Columbina potential for habitat Bird Treaty streams provide passerina) present Act sufficient moisture for a narrow band of trees and shrubs along the margins

Open woodlands, State – pine-oak association, Habitat assessment Endangered, Elegant Trogon scrubby woodland and indicated no Migratory No Effect (Trogon elegans) second growth, potential for habitat Bird Treaty primarily in arid or present Act semi-arid regions

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Riparian, bare rock/talus/scree, desert, shrubland/chaparral, Gray-banded Habitat assessment burrows in or uses Kingsnake State - indicated no soil, fallen log/debris. No Effect (Lampropeltis Endangered potential for habitat Dry rocky dissected alterna) present desert terrain, vegetated primarily by Chihuahuan Desert plants

In New Mexico during warm months, arid State – juniper woodlands on Threatened, foothills and mesas, May Effect – Not Habitat assessment Gray Vireo Migratory often associated with Likely to indicated potential (Viero vicinior) Bird Treaty oaks and usually in Adversely Affect for habitat present Act habitat with a well- developed grass component

Grassland/herbaceous, savannas, limestone Kuenzler Hedgehog ledges, rock cracks, Cactus gentle slops; or on flat May Effect – Not Habitat assessment Federal - (Echinocereus steps of sunny, grass- Likely to indicated potential Endangered fenleri var. covered hillsides in Adversely Affect for habitat present kuenzleri) the lower fringes of pinyon-juniper savannah

Breed in ephemeral Federal/State wetlands, riparian and – Habitat assessment Least Tern marine habitats, Endangered, indicated no (Sternula coastal areas, nests on No Effect Migratory potential for habitat antillarum) ground that are Bird Treaty present relatively free of Act vegetation

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Sedge-forb willow New Mexico zones along Habitat assessment Meadow Jumping permanent streams, Federal/State indicated no Mouse meadows in river No Effect - Endangered potential for habitat (Zapus hudsonius floodplains, and present luteus) riparian zones along irrigation ditches

Mexican Spotted Mature, old-growth Habitat assessment Owl Federal - forests of white pine, indicated no No Effect (Strix occidentalis Threatened Douglas fir, and potential for habitat lucida) ponderosa pine present

Rocky canyons, hillsides, favors areas of boulders and rock, Mottled Rock Habitat assessment including talus slopes Rattlesnake State - indicated no with abundant hiding No Effect (Crotalus lepidus Threatened potential for habitat places, in New lepidus) present Mexico, elevations between 1,200 and 2,600 meters

Rivers, lakes, marshes, and seacoasts. Prefers State – shallow clear water at Neotropic Habitat assessment Threatened, lower elevations, also Cormorant indicated no Migratory on mountain streams No Effect (Phalacrocorax potential for habitat Bird Treaty and alpine lakes. Nests brasilianus) present Act on coastal islands, and around inland lakes, reservoirs

Open rangeland and Northern Aplomado Experimental savanna, Habitat assessment Falcon Population, semiarid/desert indicated no No Effect (Falco femoralis Non- grasslands with potential for habitat septentrionalis) Essential scattered trees and present shrubs

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Primarily in Penasco Least Federal – Sacramento Habitat assessment Chipmunk Candidate, Mountains, in and indicated no No Effect (Tamias minimus State - near ponderosa pine potential for habitat atristriatus) Endangered forest, mainly in open present situations

Wetlands, riparian areas, and montane State – coniferous forests to Habitat assessment Threatened, Peregrine Falcon Mohave and Sonoran indicated no Migratory No Effect (Falco peregrinus) Desert Scrub, on cliffs potential for habitat Bird Treaty that are in present Act wooded/forested habitats

Restricted to coniferous forests at high elevations with substantial forest Sacramento Habitat assessment canopy, along with Mountain State - indicated no cover (rocks, organic No Effect Salamander Threatened potential for habitat litter). Significant (Aneides hardii) present preference for areas with higher densities of large fir and all size classes of spruce

Restricted to Sacramento Mountains of south- Habitat assessment Sacramento central New Mexico Federal - indicated no Mountains Thistle with elevation (7,500- No Effect Threatened potential for habitat (Cirsium vinaceum) 9,500 feet). Adapted present to high levels of calcium in the soil and suspended in water

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Dry hills, pinyon- juniper zone, loose Sacramento Prickly gravelly soils of open Poppy May Effect – Not Habitat assessment Federal - disturbed sites, canyon (Argemone Likely to indicated potential Endangered bottoms and slopes, pleiacantha ssp. Adversely Affect for habitat present along drainages, and pinnatisecta) near lakes in water pipelines

Forested wetlands, old field, shrublands, along rivers or Southwestern Habitat assessment streams, woodlands, Willow Flycatcher Federal/State indicated no riparian and wetland No Effect (Empidonax traillii - Endangered potential for habitat thickets usually with extimus) present tamarisk or willow, areas of dense vegetation

Desert to montane coniferous stands, including open Habitat assessment Spotted Bat State - ponderosa pine, indicated no (Euderma No Effect Threatened pinyon-juniper potential for habitat maculatum) woodland, canyon present bottoms, open pasture, and hayfields

State – Arid thorn bush and Habitat assessment Varied Bunting Threatened, thickets, dry washes indicated no (Passerina Migratory No Effect and arid scrub, often potential for habitat versicolor) Bird Treaty near water present Act

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Strong preference to native grasslands with Federal – vegetation of Habitat assessment Candidate, Sprague’s Pipit intermediate height indicated no Migratory No Effect (Anthus spragueii) and lacking woody potential for habitat Bird Treaty shrubs, generally present Act 3,000 to 5,000 feet elevations

Steep gravelly north- and east-facing slopes with loose, gypseous- Todsen’s limestones soils at May Effect – Not Habitat assessment Federal - Pennyroyal about 2,000 meters Likely to indicated potential Endangered (Hedeoma todsenii) elevation, usually Adversely Affect for habitat present surrounded by open pinyon-juniper woodland

State – Montane forest, pine- White-eared Habitat assessment Threatened, oak woods, mountain Hummingbird indicated no Migratory canyons, in areas No Effect (Hylocharis potential for habitat Bird Treaty dominated by oak, leucotis) present Act pine, or fir

Marshy wetlands Habitat assessment Wright’s Marsh Federal - (cienegas) near indicated no Thistle No Effect Candidate springs in otherwise potential for habitat (Cirsium wrightii) semi-arid areas present

Deciduous riparian Federal – woodlands, chaparral, Yellow-billed Habitat assessment Threatened, pastures, orchards, Cuckoo indicated no Migratory parks, breed in dense No Effect (Coccyzus potential for habitat Bird Treaty willow and americanus) present Act cottonwood stands in river floodplains

Coyote Canyon Trileaf# 619424

Species / Resource Federal / Recommendation Notes / Habitat Description Name State Status of Effect Documentation

Open coniferous forest, pine-oak association and State – adjacent scrub, brush, Habitat assessment Threatened, Yellow-eyed Junco pastures and fields. indicated no Migratory No Effect (Junco phaeonotus) Nests usually on potential for habitat Bird Treaty ground; nest often present Act concealed under bunch grass, a log, rock, or bush

Conclusions: Based on the efforts undertaken during our IBA, project specifications and the current data made available, we have concluded that there may be potential for the proposed project to have an effect on several threatened and endangered species and migratory birds.

It should be noted that this informal biological assessment was conducted in accordance with the Scope of Work and does not constitute a Section 7 Biological Assessment under the Endangered Species Act (50 CFR Part 402.01).

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

Please refer to Appendix A for Site Maps and Appendix B for Site Photographs United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office 2105 OSUNA ROAD NE ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113 PHONE: (505)346-2525 FAX: (505)346-2542 URL: www.fws.gov/southwest/es/NewMexico/; www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ES_Lists_Main2.html

Consultation Code: 02ENNM00-2015-SLI-0482 July 23, 2015 Event Code: 02ENNM00-2015-E-00586 Project Name: COYOTE CANYON

Subject: List of threatened and endangered species that may occur in your proposed project location, and/or may be affected by your proposed project

To Whom It May Concern:

Thank you for your recent request for information on federally listed species and important wildlife habitats that may occur in your project area. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has responsibility for certain species of New Mexico wildlife under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 as amended (16 USC 1531 et seq.), the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) as amended (16 USC 701-715), and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) as amended (16 USC 668-668c). We are providing the following guidance to assist you in determining which federally imperiled species may or may not occur within your project area and to recommend some conservation measures that can be included in your project design.

FEDERALLY-LISTED SPECIES AND DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT

Attached is a list of endangered, threatened, and proposed species that may occur in your project area. Your project area may not necessarily include all or any of these species. Under the ESA, it is the responsibility of the Federal action agency or its designated representative to determine if a proposed action "may affect" endangered, threatened, or proposed species, or designated critical habitat, and if so, to consult with the Service further. Similarly, it is the responsibility of the Federal action agency or project proponent, not the Service, to make "no effect" determinations. If you determine that your proposed action will have "no effect" on threatened or endangered species or their respective critical habitat, you do not need to seek concurrence with the Service. Nevertheless, it is a violation of Federal law to harm or harass any federally-listed threatened or endangered fish or wildlife species without the appropriate permit.

If you determine that your proposed action may affect federally-listed species, consultation with the Service will be necessary. Through the consultation process, we will analyze information contained in a biological assessment that you provide. If your proposed action is associated with Federal funding or permitting, consultation will occur with the Federal agency under section 7(a)(2) of the ESA. Otherwise, an incidental take permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA (also known as a habitat conservation plan) is necessary to harm or harass federally listed threatened or endangered fish or wildlife species. In either case, there is no mechanism for authorizing incidental take "after-the-fact." For more information regarding formal consultation and HCPs, please see the Service's Consultation Handbook and Habitat Conservation Plans at www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/index.html#consultations.

The scope of federally listed species compliance not only includes direct effects, but also any interrelated or interdependent project activities (e.g., equipment staging areas, offsite borrow material areas, or utility relocations) and any indirect or cumulative effects that may occur in the action area. The action area includes all areas to be affected, not merely the immediate area involved in the action. Large projects may have effects outside the immediate area to species not listed here that should be addressed. If your action area has suitable habitat for any of the attached species, we recommend that species-specific surveys be conducted during the flowering season for plants and at the appropriate time for wildlife to evaluate any possible project-related impacts.

Candidate Species and Other Sensitive Species

A list of candidate and other sensitive species in your area is also attached. Candidate species and other sensitive species are species that have no legal protection under the ESA, although we recommend that candidate and other sensitive species be included in your surveys and considered for planning purposes. The Service monitors the status of these species. If significant declines occur, these species could potentially be listed. Therefore, actions that may contribute to their decline should be avoided.

Lists of sensitive species including State-listed endangered and threatened species are compiled by New Mexico state agencies. These lists, along with species information, can be found at the following websites:

Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON-M): www.bison-m.org

New Mexico State Forestry. The New Mexico Endangered Plant Program: www.emnrd.state.nm.us/SFD/ForestMgt/Endangered.html

New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council, New Mexico Rare Plants: nmrareplants.unm.edu

Natural Heritage New Mexico, online species database: nhnm.unm.edu

WETLANDS AND FLOODPLAINS

Under Executive Orders 11988 and 11990, Federal agencies are required to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands and floodplains, and preserve and enhance their natural and beneficial values. These habitats should be conserved through avoidance, or mitigated to ensure that there would be no net loss of wetlands function and value.

2 We encourage you to use the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps in conjunction with ground-truthing to identify wetlands occurring in your project area. The Service's NWI program website, www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html integrates digital map data with other resource information. We also recommend you contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for permitting requirements under section 404 of the Clean Water Act if your proposed action could impact floodplains or wetlands.

MIGRATORY BIRDS

The MBTA prohibits the taking of migratory birds, nests, and eggs, except as permitted by the Service's Migratory Bird Office. To minimize the likelihood of adverse impacts to migratory birds, we recommend construction activities occur outside the general bird nesting season from March through August, or that areas proposed for construction during the nesting season be surveyed, and when occupied, avoided until the young have fledged.

We recommend review of Birds of Conservation Concern at website www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/CurrentBirdIssues/Management/BCC.html to fully evaluate the effects to the birds at your site. This list identifies birds that are potentially threatened by disturbance and construction.

BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLES

The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was delisted under the ESA on August 9, 2007. Both the bald eagle and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos) are still protected under the MBTA and BGEPA. The BGEPA affords both eagles protection in addition to that provided by the MBTA, in particular, by making it unlawful to "disturb" eagles. Under the BGEPA, the Service may issue limited permits to incidentally "take" eagles (e.g., injury, interfering with normal breeding, feeding, or sheltering behavior nest abandonment). For information on bald and golden eagle management guidelines, we recommend you review information provided at www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/guidelines/bgepa.html.

On our web site www.fws.gov/southwest/es/NewMexico/SBC_intro.cfm, we have included conservation measures that can minimize impacts to federally listed and other sensitive species. These include measures for communication towers, power line safety for raptors, road and highway improvements, spring developments and livestock watering facilities, wastewater facilities, and trenching operations.

We also suggest you contact the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, and the New Mexico Energy, Minerals, and Natural Resources Department, Forestry Division for information regarding State fish, wildlife, and plants.

Thank you for your concern for endangered and threatened species and New Mexico's wildlife habitats. We appreciate your efforts to identify and avoid impacts to listed and sensitive species in your project area. For further consultation on your proposed activity, please call 505-346-2525 or email [email protected] and reference your Service Consultation Tracking Number.

Attachment

3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: COYOTE CANYON

Official Species List

Provided by: New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office 2105 OSUNA ROAD NE ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87113 (505) 346-2525 http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/NewMexico/ http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ES_Lists_Main2.html

Consultation Code: 02ENNM00-2015-SLI-0482 Event Code: 02ENNM00-2015-E-00586

Project Type: COMMUNICATIONS TOWER

Project Name: COYOTE CANYON Project Description: Client is proposing to construct a 195-foot self-support communications tower approximately 1.59 miles north of Hwy 70 (north of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314) within a 75- foot by 75-foot proposed lease area. Proposed access/utility easement will follow Hunter Road, connecting with Hwy 70.

Please Note: The FWS office may have modified the Project Name and/or Project Description, so it may be different from what was submitted in your previous request. If the Consultation Code matches, the FWS considers this to be the same project. Contact the office in the 'Provided by' section of your previous Official Species list if you have any questions or concerns.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/23/2015 04:53 PM 1 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: COYOTE CANYON

Project Location Map:

Project Coordinates: The coordinates are too numerous to display here.

Project Counties: Otero, NM

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/23/2015 04:53 PM 2 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: COYOTE CANYON

Endangered Species Act Species List

There are a total of 12 threatened, endangered, or candidate species on your species list. Species on this list should be considered in an effects analysis for your project and could include species that exist in another geographic area. For example, certain fish may appear on the species list because a project could affect downstream species. Critical habitats listed under the Has Critical Habitat column may or may not lie within your project area. See the Critical habitats within your project area section further below for critical habitat that lies within your project. Please contact the designated FWS office if you have questions.

Birds Status Has Critical Habitat Condition(s)

Least tern (Sterna antillarum) Endangered Population: interior pop.

Mexican Spotted owl (Strix Threatened Final designated occidentalis lucida) Population: Entire

northern aplomado falcon (Falco Experimental femoralis septentrionalis) Population, Non- Population: U.S.A (AZ, NM) Essential

Sprague's Pipit (Anthus spragueii) Candidate

Yellow-Billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus Threatened Proposed americanus) Population: Western U.S. DPS

Flowering Plants

Kuenzler Hedgehog cactus Endangered (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri)

Sacramento Mountains thistle Threatened (Cirsium vinaceum)

Sacramento Prickly poppy (Argemone Endangered

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/23/2015 04:53 PM 3 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: COYOTE CANYON

pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta)

Todsen's pennyroyal (Hedeoma Endangered Final designated todsenii)

Wright's Marsh thistle (Cirsium Candidate wrightii)

Mammals

New Mexico meadow jumping mouse Endangered Proposed (Zapus hudsonius luteus)

Penasco least chipmunk (Tamias Candidate minimus atristriatus)

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/23/2015 04:53 PM 4 United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Project name: COYOTE CANYON

Critical habitats that lie within your project area There are no critical habitats within your project area.

http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac, 07/23/2015 04:53 PM 5 11/11/2015 BISON-M

Close Window Back Disclaimer Policy Print Page Report County TES Table for

Otero NEW MEXICO WILDLIFE OF CONCERN

For complete up-dated information on federal-listed species, including plants, see the US Fish & W ildlife Service website at http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/wizard/chooseLocation!prepare.action. For information on state-listed plants, contact the NM Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, Division of Forestry, or go to http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/ . I f your project is on Bureau of Land Management, contact the local BLM Field Office for information on species of particular concern. I f your project is on a National Forest, contact the Forest Supervisor's office for species information. E = Endangered; T = Threatened; s = sensitive; SOC = Species of Concern; C = Candidate; Exp = Experimental non-essential population; P = P roposed

Export to Excel

Common Name Scientific Name NMGF US FWS Critical Habitat

Spotted Bat Euderma maculatum T

P enasco Least Chipmunk Tamias minimus atristriatus E C

Meadow Jumping Mouse Zapus hudsonius luteus E E

Brown P elican Pelecanus occidentalis E

Common Black Hawk Buteogallus anthracinus T

Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus T

Aplomado Falcon Falco femoralis E E

P eregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus T

Arctic P eregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus tundrius T

Least Tern Sternula antillarum E E

Neotropic Cormorant Phalacrocorax brasilianus T

Common Ground-dove Columbina passerina E

Mexican Spotted Owl Strix occidentalis lucida T Y

Broad-billed Hummingbird Cynanthus latirostris T

White-eared Hummingbird Hylocharis leucotis T

Elegant Trogon Trogon elegans E

Southwestern W illow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus E E Y

Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii T

Gray Vireo Vireo vicinior T http://www.bison-m.org/reports.aspx?rtype=9 1/2 11/11/2015 BISON-M Sprague's P ipit Anthus spragueii C

Yellow-eyed Junco Junco phaeonotus T

Baird's Sparrow Ammodramus bairdii T

Varied Bunting Passerina versicolor T

Gray-banded Kingsnake Lampropeltis alterna E

Mottled Rock Rattlesnake Crotalus lepidus lepidus T

Sacramento Mtn. Salamander Aneides hardii T

W hite Sands P upfish Cyprinodon tularosa T

______Close Window

http://www.bison-m.org/reports.aspx?rtype=9 2/2 1/7/2016 Rare Plant List

Home Results of County Search About NMRPTC OTERO Contacts Scientific name County-NM Rare Plant List Anulocaulis leiosolenus var. howardii Otero County List Aquilegia chaplinei Eddy, Otero Agency Status Argemone pinnatisecta Otero Photo List Astragalus altus Otero Astragalus neomexicanus Chaves, Lincoln, Otero About the List Cirsium inornatum Lincoln, Otero History of Changes Cirsium vinaceum Otero Chaves, Eddy, Guadalupe, Otero, Species Cirsium wrightii Considered, Sierra, Socorro but dropped Delphinium novomexicanum Lincoln, Otero Photographers, Dermatophyllum guadalupense Eddy, Otero Illustrators and Draba standleyi Doña Ana, Otero, Sierra, Socorro Authors Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln, Otero Image Usage Ericameria nauseosa var. texensis Eddy, Otero Guidelines

Sponsors Erigeron rybius Lincoln, Otero

Discussion Eriogonum wootonii Lincoln, Otero Group Escobaria villardii Doña Ana, Otero Useful Hedeoma pulcherrima Lincoln, Otero Literature Hedeoma todsenii Otero, Sierra Links Heuchera wootonii Catron, Lincoln, Otero Hexalectris arizonica Doña Ana, Hidalgo, Otero, Sierra Hexalectris nitida Eddy, Otero Lepidospartum burgessii Otero Lupinus sierrae-blancae Lincoln, Otero Mentzelia humilis var. guadalupensis Otero Microthelys rubrocallosa Otero Muhlenbergia villiflora var. villosa Eddy, Otero Nama xylopodum Chaves, Eddy, Otero Nerisyrenia hypercorax Chaves, Otero Paronychia wilkinsonii Otero Penstemon alamosensis Doña Ana, Lincoln, Otero Penstemon cardinalis ssp. cardinalis Lincoln, Otero http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/county_result.php?output=html 1/2 1/7/2016 Rare Plant List Penstemon cardinalis ssp. regalis Eddy, Otero Penstemon neomexicanus Lincoln, Otero Perityle staurophylla var. staurophylla Doña Ana, Otero, Sierra Phacelia cloudcroftensis Otero Philadelphus microphyllus var. Lincoln, Otero argyrocalyx Physaria aurea Lincoln, Otero Potentilla sierrae-blancae Lincoln, Otero Ribes mescalerium Lincoln, Otero Sedum integrifolium ssp. Lincoln, Otero neomexicanum Senecio sacramentanus Lincoln, Otero Synthyris oblongifolia Lincoln, Otero Valeriana texana Eddy, Lincoln, Otero

Photo credits in header Peniocereus greggii var. greggii © T. Todsen, Lepidospartum burgessii © M. Howard, Argemone pleiacantha ssp. pinnatisecta © R. Sivinski ©2005 New Mexico Rare Plant Technical Council

http://nmrareplants.unm.edu/county_result.php?output=html 2/2 Dena Whitaker

From: Dennis, George Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 12:03 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: Federal Consultation IBA Submittal: #619424 "Coyote Canyon"

Thank you for your inquiry about potential fish and wildlife impacts of your project. In New Mexico you can now obtain an official letter on Federal trust resources from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) via our Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPAC).

You can access IPAC through our office website at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/newmexico/IPAC.cfm

On this page there are instructions on how to use IPAC http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/newmexico/documents/IPAC_Help.pdf and conservation measures for several project types (right side of the page).

On the “Tasks” page make sure you select the "Request an Official Species List" button to get an official letter.

If you make a no-effect determination for all species listed in your letter then no further consultation with the Service is necessary. Your official letter and determination table are your documentation of your environmental review.

If you determine that your project may adversely affect a federally listed species you can submit a request for further review by the Service or help with your review electronically at [email protected].

Regards, George Dennis

George D. Dennis III, Ph.D. Collaborative Conservation Services and Administration Branch Chief New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2105 Osuna Rd NE Albuquerque, NM 87113 505-761-4754 [email protected]

1 Dena Whitaker

From: Dennis, George Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:13 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424: Consultation No. 02ENNM00-2015-I-0482

Dear Ms. Whitaker:

Thank you for your inquiry of January 14, 2016, and request for review of your project. You propose to construct a 59-meter (m) (195-foot (ft)) high self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 23 m (75 ft) by 23 m (75 ft) area at latitude 33.1833 and longitude -105.8479 in Otero County, New Mexico. The project includes a 6-m (20-ft) wide access/utility easement that extends along Hunter Road to US Highway 70.

You made a may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect determination for the federally listed Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri), Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta), and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii).

We have no survey information in the area of your project. All three plants occur in nearby areas. Based on the south facing slope and soil types identified there may not be suitable habitat for these plants in the project area. The following is a brief description of suitable habitat conditions for these species.

Todsen’s pennyroyal prefers gypseous, sandy loam soils, often with loose limestone gravel and cobble usually on steep north or east-facing slopes at 1,900 – 2,300 m (6,200 – 7,400 ft). Most populations occur within pinyon-juniper woodland, where the species may grow under the tree and shrub canopy or in grassy woodland openings without the presence of tree or shrub canopy. The species flowers July to September.

Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus prefers gentle, gravelly to rocky slopes and benches on limestone or limy sandstone, in grassland, oak woodland, or pinyon-juniper woodland. Most occur on southern and eastern aspects at elevations from 1,600 to 2,100 m (5,200 – 6,900 ft). It flowers in May to early June.

Sacramento prickly poppy prefers loose, gravelly soils of open disturbed sites; canyon bottoms and slopes, and sometimes along roadsides from 1,300 – 2,200 m (4,200 – 7,100 ft). It flowers from May to August.

Given the lack of knowledge about the flora in the project area we recommend a plant survey be conducted during the flowering season by a botanist before starting ground disturbing activities. Any target or other rare plants found in the project area should be flagged and construction personnel alerted to avoid these areas. Staying on existing roads and trails, where possible, will minimize additional disturbance.

Conducting the ground disturbing activities outside the main bird nesting season from March through August would minimize impacts to migratory birds.

Based on the project area being surveyed for federally listed plants, and any located plants avoided, or the area determined unsuitable for these plants we concur with your determination of may affect but not likely to adversely affect the Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, Sacramento prickly poppy, and Todsen’s pennyroyal.

1 Thank you for your concern for New Mexico’s unique flora. If you have further questions please reference consultation number 02ENNM00-2015-I-0482 and contact me at [email protected] or 505-761-4754.

Regards, George Dennis

George D. Dennis III, Ph.D. Collaborative Conservation Services and Administration Branch Chief New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2105 Osuna Rd NE Albuquerque, NM 87113 505-761-4754 [email protected]

2 Dena Whitaker

From: Watson, Mark L., DGF Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 11:49 AM To: Dena Whitaker Cc: Watson, Mark L., DGF Subject: Crown Castle Coyote Canyon cell tower Otero Co. NM

Hi Dena,

The Department has reviewed your IBA for the above‐referenced project.

Because the project is proposed for construction within relatively undeveloped migratory bird habitat, the Department requests that cell tower construction activities occur outside of the migratory bird breeding season of April 1 to September 15, to avoid disturbance to nesting migratory birds.

With implementation of this recommendations, the Department does not anticipate significant adverse effects to wildlife or sensitive wildlife habitats.

Thanks for consulting with us.

Mark L. Watson Terrestrial Habitat Specialist Division of Ecological and Environmental Planning NM Department of Game and Fish P.O. Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 1 Wildlife Way Santa Fe, NM 87507 (505) 476‐8115 FAX: (505) 476‐8128

For NM wildlife info, visit Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON‐M): Species Accounts, Searches and County Lists (use the "Database Query" option): http://www.bison‐m.org/ Habitat Handbook Project Guidelines: http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/conservation/habitat‐information/habitat‐handbook/

Conserving New Mexico’s Wildlife for Future Generations

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e‐mail, including all attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient[s] and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, disclosure or distribution is prohibited, unless specifically provided under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender at once and destroy all copies of this message.

1

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

October 24, 2016

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service New Mexico Ecological Field Office Attn: Dr. George Dennis 2105 Osuna Road NE Albuquerque, NM 87113 (505) 761-4754 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Dr. Dennis,

The informal biological assessment completed by Trileaf was submitted to your Office for review on December 16, 2015. We received the response letter from your Office on January 29, 2016. Since the time of your review, we have conducted a biological survey for two (2) listed plants on June 7 and June 8, 2016: Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii). Potential habitat for Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) was also surveyed during this time.

Based on the species observed and photographs taken at the site during the survey, the habitat type does not fit the requirements for the Todsen’s pennyroyal. Trileaf believes no additional work/survey is needed for this species in the project area. As noted in the attached report, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti and Sacramento prickly poppy were not observed in any of the survey zones. In addition, based on the habitat type and/or lack of observed species, Trileaf anticipates no effect to the species of concern listed above for this project.

Trileaf is requesting a review from USFWS for the plant survey conducted to concur with these findings. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

October 24, 2016

New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Environmental Planning Division Attn: Mr. Mark Watson – Terrestrial Habitat Specialist PO Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 (505) 476-8115 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Mr. Watson,

The informal biological assessment completed by Trileaf was submitted to your Department for review on December 16, 2015. We received the response letter from your Department on December 22, 2015. Since the time of your review, we have conducted a biological survey for two (2) listed plants on June 7 and June 8, 2016: Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii). Potential habitat for Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) was also surveyed during this time.

Based on the species observed and photographs taken at the site during the survey, the habitat type does not fit the requirements for the Todsen’s pennyroyal. Trileaf believes no additional work/survey is needed for this species in the project area. As noted in the attached report, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti and Sacramento prickly poppy were not observed in any of the survey zones. In addition, based on the habitat type and/or lack of observed species, Trileaf anticipates no effect to the species of concern listed above for this project.

Trileaf is requesting a review from NMDGF for the plant survey conducted to concur with these findings. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

October 24, 2016

New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department Forestry Division Attn: Ms. Daniela Roth – Botany Program Coordinator 1220 S. St. Francis Dr. Santa Fe, NM 84505 (505) 476-3347 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Ms. Roth,

Trileaf contacted your Department on January 7, 2016 regarding potential habitats that may exist in the proposed cell tower project site for the two (2) listed species: Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii). We received the response email from your Department on January 8, 2016 with the recommendation of surveying for those species before construction commencement. Since the time of your review, we have conducted the biological survey for the two listed plants on June 7 and June 8, 2016. Potential habitat for Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) was also surveyed during this time.

Based on the species observed and photographs taken at the site during the survey, the habitat type does not fit the requirements for the Todsen’s pennyroyal. Trileaf believes no additional work/survey is needed for this species in the project area. As noted in the attached report, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti and Sacramento prickly poppy were not observed in any of the survey zones. In addition, based on the habitat type and/or lack of observed species, Trileaf anticipates no effect to the species of concern listed above for this project.

Trileaf is requesting a review from EMNRD Forestry Division for the plant survey conducted to concur with these findings. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

September 19, 2016

New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department Forestry Division Attn: Ms. Daniela Roth – Botany Program Coordinator 1220 S. St. Francis Dr. Santa Fe, NM 84505 (505) 476-3347 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Ms. Roth,

Trileaf contacted your Department on January 7, 2016 regarding potential habitats that may exist in the proposed cell tower project site for the two (2) listed species: Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri) and Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii). We received the response email from your Department on January 8, 2016 with the recommendation of surveying for those species before construction commencement. Since the time of your review, we have conducted the biological survey for the two listed plants on June 7 and June 8, 2016. Potential habitat for Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) was also surveyed during this time.

Based on the species observed and photographs taken at the site during the survey, the habitat type does not fit the requirements for the Todsen’s pennyroyal. Trileaf believes no additional work/survey is needed for this species in the project area. As noted in the attached report, Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti and Sacramento prickly poppy were not observed in any of the survey zones. In addition, based on the habitat type and/or lack of observed species, Trileaf anticipates no effect to the species of concern listed above for this project.

Trileaf is requesting a review from EMNRD Forestry Division for the plant survey conducted to concur with these findings. If you need additional information or have any questions you may reach me at (480) 850-0575 or [email protected]. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist

Biological Survey Report

Coyote Canyon Crown Castle BUN # 821945 Trileaf # 619424 North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM, 88314

Prepared For: Crown Castle 200 Corporate Drive Cannonsburg, PA 15317

Prepared By:

September 19, 2016

Section 1: Introduction

Trileaf Corporation, (Trileaf) was hired to complete an environmental NEPA screening for the above-referenced Crown Castle site. The purpose of a NEPA Land Use Screening is to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). During this review several species of concern were identified by both state and federal Fish and Game agencies and surveys were requested before the NEPA review or construction could occur. See Table 1 below for the species of concern, their listing status, and their blooming season.

Table 1: Species of concern and their blooming season Common Name Scientific Name Listing Status Blooming Season Kuenzler’s hedgehog Echinocereus fendleri Federal– May to early June cactus var. kuenzleri Endangered, State – Listed Sacramento prickly Argemone pinnatisecta Federal– May to August poppy Endangered, State – Listed Todsen’s pennyroyal Hedeoma todsenii Federal– July to September Endangered, State – Listed

As a result, Trileaf dispatched Environmental Biologists, Dena Whitaker and Patricia Rees to perform an intensive survey for the species of concern and their habitat. The surveys were performed from June 7 to June 8, 2016. Weather conditions were typical for this time of year, dry and sunny during the day with rain showers in the evenings and temperatures ranging from the mid-50’s to lower 90’s.

This time period coincided with the bloom seasons for the Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus and the Sacramento prickle poppy, so the entire area of disturbance and prescribed buffer area were surveyed for these species. The surveys occurred just outside of the blooming season for the Todsen’s pennyroyal so an extensive habitat survey was performed for this species in order to determine if additional surveys would be required. For more information on the survey methods refer to Section 4.

Section 2: Project Description

Crown Castle proposes to construct and operate an unmanned communications facility in the general vicinity of north of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, NM 88314. The approximate coordinate location for the tower and equipment site is 33-10-59.263 N, 105-50-52.052 W. The elevation ranges from approximately 6,100 feet at the base of the survey area near US Highway 70 up to 7,344 feet at the proposed tower and equipment site.

Project activities will include the construction of a 195-foot tall self-support communication tower with an overall height of 199 feet. The tower and associated ground based equipment will be located within a 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square foot) lease area. Power and telco will be provided to the site via a proposed pole line utility easement generally following Hunter Road extending approximately 1.88 miles south to US Highway 70; 33 utility poles will be installed along this utility easement. The site will be accessed using an existing dirt access road, Hunter Road, measuring approximately 20 feet wide extending approximately 2.26 miles generally north connecting to an existing access road north of the site. There are no propositions for modifying the existing access road. The survey drawings for this project is located in Appendix A.

Part of the proposed pole line utility easements and the existing access road goes over the BLM ROW lease area, whereas remaining sections are privately owned. The utility easement area for the BLM segment is approximately 3.93 acres and approximately 17.88 acres for the privately owned segments; standard 20-foot wide utility easement with 40-foot radii around each pole with buffer zone added around the 40-foot radii. The survey drawings for this project is located in Appendix A.

Section 3: Species Overview

Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus (Echinocereus fendleri var. kuenzleri) is typically found growing against limestone to limy sandstone on gravelly to rocky gentle slopes in Great Plains grassland, oak or piñon-juniper woodland, or mixed juniper-yucca savanna. They usually grow on the southern and eastern aspects of the terrain in Otero County at elevations from 5,200 to 6,990 feet. The species is often associated with Curly-leaf muhly (Muhlenbergia setifolia), Blue grama (Bouteloua gracilis) and Sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipendula var. caespitosa), and are more likely to be found amongst native bunch grasses, against rocks, or in grass tufts.

Sacramento prickly poppy (Argemone pinnatisecta) prefers to grow at elevations from 4,200 to 7,100 feet in an environment with little to moderate moisture. The species are often seen growing in loose gravelly soils, at times along roadsides, and open disturbed sites near canyon bottoms, typically on the western slope of the Sacramento Mountains. They are often found on steep rocky slopes and canyons in piñon-juniper woodlands, Chihuahuan desert scrublands, grasslands, and the edge of ponderosa pine-conifer woodlands. Most documented areas were recorded east of the City of Alamogordo.

Todsen’s pennyroyal (Hedeoma todsenii) grows within open piñon-juniper woodland communities and specifically on loose gypseous-limestone soils; they are occasionally also found in Ponderosa-Douglas fir woodlands. The species thrives on north and east-facing aspects in micro-climates that are cooler and moister. The species are usually associated with Broad- tailed humming birds (Selasphorus platycercus) and prefers slopes that are steep, sometimes under canopy of shrubs at elevation from 6,200 to 7,400 feet.

Section 4: Methods

The surveys included intensive coverage of the majority of the disturbance area zones described in Section 2 plus the buffer areas described in Table 2 below. At the outer edge of the disturbance area the buffer zones were applied.

The survey consisted of walking transects approximately 10 feet apart along the entire length of the disturbance area and buffer in all accessible areas. It should be noted that some of the habitat contained within these zones could not be surveyed due to safety concerns as a result of the steep slopes and loose rocky soils. Maps showing the areas that could not be accessed are included in Appendix B.

Table 2: Buffer Sizes by Ownership Ownership Buffer Width Private 20 feet BLM 40 feet

For all areas that could be accessed all species of concern or similar species were flagged, measured, and photographed for further research in the office. For each individual or cluster that was observed the location was plotted on an aerial photograph an and approximate GPS coordinate was recorded and is available by request. In order to simplify the process of recording observed species the entire survey area was broken down into sixsmaller segments. The habitat and species occurrences for each segment are discussed in Section 5 below.

Section 5: Observations

Overall Project Area The proposed sites rea located within the south to southeast facing slopes of the Sacramento Mountain. The slopes on the project area varied; from relatively flat to steep slopes of up to approximately 60 degrees. Soil seemed to consist of sandy clay with gravelly stones and larger rocks. Vegetation varied slightly depending on the elevation and the lease area against the proposed easements, however similar species were observed throughout the proposed project locations. The dominant species observed include the following: Muhly grass (Muhlenbergia spp.), Yucca (Asparagaceae sp.), Rose (Rosaceae sp.), Claret-Cup cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. triglochidiatus), possible Amaranthaceae family, possible Shrub oak (Quercus turbinella), possible Fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), Pine trees (Pinus sp.), and possible Crucifixion thorn (Castela emoryi). Weather conditions were typical for this time of year, dry and sunny during the day with rain showers in the evenings and temperatures ranging from the mid-50’s to lower 90’s.

Todsen’s pennyroyal: As the species tend to thrive in the north and east facing aspects of mountains and preferring the cooler and moister climates, the proposed project locations does not meet these criteria as the project sites are mostly south facing aspect and tend to be hotter and drier. As such, it is less likely the species will occur within the project locations.

Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus: Although suitable habitat exists throughout the proposed project areas, species were not observed where surveys were conducted.

Segment 1 This segment includes the lease area and approximately 1,994 feet (0.38 miles) of the utility easement extending south with elevation range of approximately 6,900 to 7,344 feet. The lease area and proposed access easement that connects to the existing access road consisted of gravelly to rocky soils dominated by Muhly grass (Muhlenbergia spp.), Yucca (Asparagaceae spp.), and a species of the Rosaceae family; some Echinocereus sp. were also observed. The area was mostly dry and flat, with northwest facing gentle slope, however southeast of site consisted of steeper, rocky southeast facing slopes transitioning into piñon-juniper woodland. Although Segment 1 has a generally west facing aspects with relatively drier habitat, Segment 1 is not situated near stream beds, terraces above stream channels, canyon bottoms, springs, or seeps, where Sacramento prickly poppies are typically found. It is Trileaf’s opinion that Segment 1 is not a suitable habitat for the Sacramento prickly poppy. Regarding Todsen’s pennyroyal, the species prefers slopes that are steep on north and east facing aspects in micro-climates that are cooler and moister. Although Segment 1 is a mostly northeast facing aspects, cooler and moister micro- climates were not observed in this area. It is Trileaf’s opinion that Segment 1 is not a suitable habitat for the Todsen’s pennyroyal. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 1.

Segment 2 Approximately 1,847 feet (0.35 miles) of the utility easement was covered for Segment 2 with elevation range of approximately 6,503 to 6,900 feet. This segment was mostly dry with generally south facing aspects. East of the survey area went into a steep, loose, rocky decline into a dry creek/wash. Some moss and softer soils were observed east of the access road and survey area at about elevation of 7,730 feet. Due to the extreme slopes and loose soil and rock this area could not be fully surveyed. This area was dominated by piñon-juniper woodland. Although this area was moister, the habitat did not exhibit the steep, sandy/gravelly profile expected for the Todsen’s pennyroyal, nor is it situated in the preferred north and east facing aspects. In addition, as described above, Segment 2 has a generally south facing aspects, with several dry/seasonal creeks and washes situated outside the project areas and the buffer zones. Although Sacramento prickly poppies can be found near the dry river beds and streams, the south facing aspects of the area are not considered suitable for the species. It is Trileaf’s opinion that Segment 2 is not a suitable habitat for the Sacramento prickly poppy. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 2.

Segment 3 Segment 3 included roughly 1,391 feet (0.26 miles) of the utility easement with elevation range of approximately 6,391 to 6,503 feet. This survey area was mostly dry with generally south facing aspects. East of the survey area went into a steep, loose, rocky decline into a dry creek/wash; due to safety concerns, this area could not be fully surveyed. This area was dominated by piñon-juniper woodland with increasing numbers of Camelthorn (Vachellia erioloba). Although suitable habitat existed for Sacramento prickly poppy, the species was not observed in this area. Segment 3 and Segment 2 exhibited similar habitats, as such no suitable habitat for Todsen’s pennyroyal was observed. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 3.

Segment 4 Approximately 1,064 feet (0.20 miles) of the utility easement was surveyed in Segment 4 with elevation range of approximately 6,287 to 6,391 feet; this area was similar in habitat to Segment 3. Another species, most likely Claret-Cup cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. triglochidiatus), were becoming more dominant in these areas compared to Segments 1 through 3. Although suitable habitat existed for Sacramento prickly poppy, the species was not observed in this area. Segment 4 and Segment 2 exhibited similar habitats, as such no suitable habitat for Todsen’s pennyroyal was observed. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 4.

Segment 5 This segment contained approximately 1,462 feet (0.28 miles) of the utility easement with the elevation range of approximately 6,219 to 6,287 feet. Segment 5 was sparsely vegetated with gravelly to rocky soils. It was mostly flat with full exposure to the sun. The exception to this was the western edge which consisted of a steep, rocky decline into a dry wash. Due to the extreme slopes and loose rock this area could not be fully surveyed. No cacti of any kind were observed and there were no indications of habitat for Todsen’s pennyroyal. Although habitat existed for the Sacramento prickly poppy, no observations of this species were made. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 5.

Segment 6 The BLM managed portion of the land/Segment 6 consisted of roughly 1,472 feet (0.28 miles) of the utility easement with the elevation range of 6,168 to 6,219 feet. This area consisted of piñon- juniper woodland of gentler slopes generally with south-facing aspect with open full exposure to sun in some areas. Survey areas extending south beyond the BLM land are privately owned and were gated; these areas could not be surveyed. Although suitable habitat existed for Sacramento prickly poppy, the species was not observed in this area. No suitable habitat for Todsen’s pennyroyal was observed in Segment 6. For Kuenzler’s hedgehog cactus, suitable habitat exists, however, species were not observed at surveyed areas of Segment 6.

Section 6: Conclusion

As noted, based on the aspects of mountain for the project areas, lack of species of concern observed, and photographs taken at the site, Trileaf believes there are no suitable habitats for the Todsen’s pennyroyal, Sacramento prickly poppy, and Kuenzler’s hedgehog cacti. It is Trileaf’s opinion that no additional work/survey is needed for these species in the project area.

Based on the habitat type and/or lack of observed individuals, Trileaf does not anticipate any effects to the species of concern at this time. However, it is impossible to positively rule out the existence of these species in the vicinity. Should the disturbance area be revised additional work may be needed. Additionally, all workers should be mindful of the species of concern and make every effort not to disturb the species if observed.

Section 7: Qualifications and Personnel

Dena Whitaker, Environmental Biologist Ms. Whitaker holds a Bachelor’s degree in Biological Sciences from the College of Charleston. Ms. Whitaker’s previous work experience includes processing biological data collected, and species identification.

Patricia Rees, Environmental Biologist/Assistant Project Manager Ms. Rees holds a B.S. degree in Environmental Science: Biology from Northern Arizona University. Ms. Rees’ previous work experience includes working with invasive species, biological data collection, and species identification. Ms. Rees has previously done rare/protected plant surveys within the Navajo Nation and in New Mexico.

Respectfully Submitted, Trileaf Corporation

Dena Whitaker Environmental Biologist

Patricia Rees Assistant Project Manager Environmental Biologist

Appendix A Site Drawings

Please refer to Appendix A for Site Plans Appendix B Site Maps

Site Location & Surrounding Properties

Access Easement Site Location Pole line utility easement Aerial Photographs Crown Castle Aerial Photograph COYOTE CANYON 2016 North of 12 Hunter Road Bent, NM 88314

Appendix C Dominant Species Observed

Site Photograph 1 – Possible Amaranthaceae family

Site Photograph 2 – Possible Shrub live oak (Quercus turbinella)

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 3 – Possible Fourwing saltbush (Atriplex canescens)

Site Photograph 4 – Muhly grass (Muhlenbergia spp.)

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 5 – Possible Claret-Cup cactus (Echinocereus triglochidiatus var. triglochidiatus)

Site Photograph 6 – Pine trees (Pinus spp.)

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 5 – Possible Crucifixion thorn (Castela emoryi)

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Appendix D Habitat Overviews of Project Areas

Site Photograph 1 – Lease area facing north

Site Photograph 2 – Lease area facing south

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 3 – Segment 1

Site Photograph 4 – Segment 3

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 5 – Segment 5

Site Photograph 6 – Segment 5

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Site Photograph 5 – Segment 5

Site Photographs Photographed: Crown Castle – Coyote Canyon North of 12 Hunter Road June 7, 2016 Bent, NM 88314

Appendix E Resumes

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

DENA WHITAKER PROJECT BIOLOGIST

Education

B.A. Biological Sciences College of Charleston / Charleston, SC

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Whitaker has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for a variety of projects, as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects. Ms. Whitaker has experience executing NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects throughout various regions of the United States, and specializes in the Western Regions.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

Field Reconnaissance Section 106 Compliance Informal Section 7 Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps Form 620/621 Submittals Flood Insurance Rate Maps Local Government Consultation Critical Habitat Maps Migratory Bird Evaluations Soil Characterization Native American Consultation Archaeological and Architectural Impacts FCC Memorandums of Agreement Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Land Use History Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Historical City Directories Environmental Evaluation Summaries

Additionally, Ms. Whitaker has worked in the Environmental Studies Department for College of Charleston helping researchers process biological data collected in the field.

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Survey Certification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Arizona Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training Humpback Whale Field Intensive Program, Marine and Coastal Ecology Center, Texas A&M University

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

PATRICIA REES SENIOR PROJECT BIOLOGIST

Education

B.S. Environmental Science / Emphasis in Biology Minors in Chemistry and Anthropology Northern Arizona University / Flagstaff, AZ

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Rees has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM), as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects.

Ms. Rees also operates as the primary and secondary point-of-contact for multiple clients, and has experience executing and managing CEQA, NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects, specializing in work within the Western Region.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

FCC Regulatory Compliance Field Reconnaissance Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Review Informal Section 7 Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps FCC Memorandums of Agreement Flood Insurance Rate Maps Native American Monitoring Critical Habitat Maps Migratory Bird Evaluations Soil Characterization Section 106 Compliance Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Form 620/621 Submittals CERCLA Liability Archaeological and Architectural Impacts Historical City Directories Local Government Consultation Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Native American Consultation Land Use History

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Surveyor Certification – US Fish and Wildlife Service and AZ Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training ANSI/FCC RF Radiation Safety Competent Person American Heart Association First Aid, CPR, and AED certification

Dena Whitaker

From: Dennis, George Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2016 1:45 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: Re: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424: Consultation No. 02ENNM00-2015-I-0482

Dear Ms. Whitaker: Thank you for sending the plant survey for this project. Based on the lack of suitable habitat or specimens observed of the three federally listed species in the area you might determine the project will have no effect to these species. If so then no further consultation is necessary.

Regards, George Dennis

George D. Dennis III, Ph.D. Collaborative Conservation Services and Administration Branch Chief New Mexico Ecological Services Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2105 Osuna Rd NE Albuquerque, NM 87113 505-761-4754 [email protected]

1 Dena Whitaker

From: Watson, Mark L., DGF Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 2:12 PM To: Dena Whitaker Cc: Roth, Daniela, EMNRD; Hayes, Chuck L., DGF; Watson, Mark L., DGF Subject: RE: Crown Castle Coyote Canyon cell tower Otero Co. NM

Hi Dena,

NMDGF does not have authority over plants in NM, nor do we have botanists on staff or any technical expertise with state listed plants.

Therefore we will take a pass on responding to your plant survey.

However, we recommend that in the future you consult our state botanist with NM State Forestry Division, Daniella Roth (cc’ed here), for projects that may affect state‐listed plants.

Thanks for checking with us.

Mark L. Watson Terrestrial Habitat Specialist Division of Ecological and Environmental Planning NM Department of Game and Fish P.O. Box 25112 Santa Fe, NM 87504 1 Wildlife Way Santa Fe, NM 87507 (505) 476‐8115 FAX: (505) 476‐8128

For NM wildlife info, visit Biota Information System of New Mexico (BISON‐M): Species Accounts, Searches and County Lists (use the "Database Query" option): http://www.bison‐m.org/ Habitat Handbook Project Guidelines: http://www.wildlife.state.nm.us/conservation/habitat‐information/habitat‐handbook/

Conserving New Mexico’s Wildlife for Future Generations

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e‐mail, including all attachments is for the sole use of the intended recipient[s] and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, copying, disclosure or distribution is prohibited, unless specifically provided under the New Mexico Inspection of Public Records Act. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender at once and destroy all copies of this message.

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 9:16 AM To: Watson, Mark L., DGF Subject: RE: Crown Castle Coyote Canyon cell tower Otero Co. NM

Mr. Watson,

1 Good morning. Trileaf consulted with your Department on December 16, 2016, regarding the potential habitat for migratory birds and plants that may exist in the proposed cell tower project site. Please see the attached document for review for the plant survey conducted during June 7-8, 2016.

If you need any additional information or questions, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you,

Dena Whitaker Environmental Biologist Trileaf Corporation (480) 850-0575 [email protected]

2 Dena Whitaker

From: Roth, Daniela, EMNRD Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 2:23 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: RE: Trileaf #619424 "Coyote Canyon" Cell Tower Project

Dear Dena Whitaker:

Thank you for providing me with the updated survey report for the : Trileaf #619424 "Coyote Canyon" Cell Tower Project. Based on the additional information provided, I concur with your findings and believe it is unlikely that State Listed Endangered Plants will be impacted by this project, as proposed.

Please let me know if I can be of additional help.

Sincerely,

Daniela Roth

Botany Program Coordinator EMNRD – Forestry Division 1220 S. Saint Francis Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 505-476-3347 http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/SFD/

1

Appendix E Cultural Resources 2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com May 26, 2016

State of New Mexico Historic Preservation Division Department of Cultural Affairs Attn: Mr. Andy Wakefiled, RPA - State Archaeologist 407 Galisteo Street, Suite 236 Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501 505-827-6320

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 FCC File # 0007061822 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

To whom it may concern:

Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

In accordance with the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission, dated September 2004, a cultural resource investigation has been conducted. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the view shed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.

Summary reports of this investigation, maps, photographs and other information are provided. As noted, no historic properties were identified in the APE for direct or visual effects, resulting in the finding that this project will have no effect National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) listed, eligible, or potentially eligible structures or sites. In addition, no archaeological sites or artifacts were encountered during the archaeological survey.

We appreciate your co-operation in this regard and anticipate your concurrence with these findings. Please call me at (480) 850-0575 or email me, [email protected], if you need any additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist I FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT
) Submission Packet Notification Date: 7AM EST 05/26/2016 See instructions for File Number: 0007235912 public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( UA ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file. 0007235912

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0024212334

4) Name: Central States Towers III, LLC

Contact Name

5) First Name: Kebreab 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Henry 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 11) Street Address: 323 S. Hale St. /Or

12) City: Wheaton 13) State: IL 14) Zip Code: 60187

15) Telephone Number: (480)850-0575 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0011724176

19) Name: Antigua Archaeology, LLC, on behalf of Trileaf Corporation

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Sarah 21) MI: 22) Last Name: Luchetta 23) Suffix:

24) Title:

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 4168 26) Street Address: /Or

27) City: Prescott 28) State: AZ 29) Zip Code: 86302

30) Telephone Number: (520)820-1094 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Kathleen 37) MI: A 38) Last Name: Crawford 39) Suffix:

40) Title:

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( ) Archaeologist

( X ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 137744

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: LSC Katie

4) Site Address: 2499 El Camino Real

5) Detailed Description of Project:

6) City: Las Cruces 7) State: NM 8) Zip Code: 88007

9) County/Borough/Parish: DONA ANA

El Camino Real Rd/Spitz Ave 10) Nearest Crossroads:

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 32-20-00.4 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 106-47-15.5 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______27.1 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( ) Self-supporting lattice

( X ) Monopole 2 ( ) Other (Describe):

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( X ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

( ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______

3 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

4 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma

Contact Name

5) First Name: Darrin 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Cisco 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/31/2016 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Comanche Nation

Kelly Banderas

THPO Assistant

03/31/2016

X

5 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Wilfred 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Ferris 8) Suffix: III

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/31/2016 11) Date Replied ______03/31/2016

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma

Kellie J Poolaw

Acting Tribal Historic Preservation Offi

03/31/2016 04/10/2016

X

6 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Mescalero Apache Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Holly 6) MI: B 7) Last Name: Houghten 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Tribal Historic Preservation Officer

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/30/2016 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Northern Cheyenne Tribe

Teanna Limpy

THPO

03/31/2016 03/30/2016

X

7 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Ohkay Owingeh (formerly known as San Juan Pueblo)

Contact Name

5) First Name: Eric 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Phillips 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Tribal Systems Administrator

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/31/2016 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Pueblo of Isleta

Daniel Waseta

Director Cultural & Historic Preservatio

03/31/2016

X

8 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Pueblo of Laguna

Contact Name

5) First Name: Gaylord 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Siow 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/31/2016 11) Date Replied ______04/18/2016

( ) No Reply

( X ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Pueblo of Tesuque

Charlie Dorame

Governmental Affairs Liaison

03/31/2016

X

9 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Pueblo of Zuni

Contact Name

5) First Name: Kenny 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bowekaty 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Supervisory Archaeologist

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/31/2016 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Southern Ute Tribe

Alden Naranjo

NAGPRA Coordinator

03/31/2016

X

10 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______137744 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______13

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

Contact Name

5) First Name: Javier 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Loera 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/30/2016 11) Date Replied ______03/30/2016

( ) No Reply

( X ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

11 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

12 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

3) Are there more than 10 historic properties within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “Yes”, you are required to attach a Cultural Resources Report in lieu of adding the Historic Property below. X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: Century 21 Motel

5) SHPO Site Number:

Property Address

6) Street Address: 2454 North Main Street

7) City: Las Cruces 8) State: NM 9) Zip Code: 88007

10) County/Borough/Parish: DONA ANA

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______ARMS

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

13 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

3) Are there more than 10 historic properties within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “Yes”, you are required to attach a Cultural Resources Report in lieu of adding the Historic Property below. X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: Prehistoric Site with no features. Buried under modern development.

5) SHPO Site Number: LA 2811

Property Address

6) Street Address: 400 meters east of Direct APE

7) City: Las Cruces 8) State: NM 9) Zip Code: 88007

10) County/Borough/Parish: DONA ANA

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

14 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: City of Las Cruces: Community Development

Contact Name

3) First Name: Adam 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Ochoa 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Planner

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 700 North Main, Suite 1100 /Or

10) City: Las Cruces 11) State: NM 12) Zip Code: 88001

13) Telephone Number: (575)528-3204 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( X ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______04/04/2016 18) Date Replied ______04/06/2016

( ) No Reply

( X ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

15 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name: Dona Ana County Historical Society

Contact Name

4) First Name: Jim 5) MI: 6) Last Name: Eckles 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: 16045 /Or

11) City: Las Cruces 12) State: NM 13) Zip Code: 88004

14) Telephone Number: (480)850-0575 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address: [email protected]

17) Preferred means of communication:

( X ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______04/04/2016 19) Date Replied ______04/14/2016

( ) No Reply

( X ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

16 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico

2) You may also designate up to three additional SHPOs/THPOs if the APEs include multiple states. If the APEs include other countries, enter the name of the National Historic Preservation Agency and any state and provincial Historic Preservation Agency.

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: Dena MI: Last Name: Whitaker Suffix:

Signature: Dena Whitaker Date: 05/25/2016 ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM OR ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION LICENSE OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 312(a)(1)), AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 503).

17 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Resumes/Vitae Resumes/Vitae 04/19/2016

Map Documents Map Documents 04/19/2016

Area of Potential Effects Area of Potential Effects 04/19/2016

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal/NHO Involvement 04/19/2016

Local Government Involvement Local Government Involvement 04/19/2016

Public Involvement Public Involvement 04/19/2016

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual Effects 04/19/2016

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct Effects 04/19/2016

Photographs Photographs 04/19/2016

State-Specific Forms State-Specific Forms 04/19/2016

State-Specific Forms Updated archaeological report 05/25/2016

Map Documents BLM portion of site survey drawing 05/25/2016

18 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 1. Consultant Information

Provide a current copy of the resume or curriculum vitae for the Principal Investigator and any researcher or other person who contributed to, reviewed, or provided significant input into the research, analysis, writing or conclusions presented in this filing.

A current copy of the resume for the Principal Investigator and any researcher or other person who contributed to, reviewed, or provided significant input into the research, analysis, writing or conclusions presented in this filing.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Sarah K. Luchetta, M.A. Owner/Principal Investigator

Antigua Archaeology, LLC [email protected]

520-820-2035

Curriculum Vita

Education and Degrees:

• Masters of Arts Archaeology. University of Arizona, Tucson. 2005. • Bachelors of Arts (magna cum laude). Anthropology and Languages. University of Arizona, Tucson. 2002 • Associates of Arts. Anthropology. • Basic Field Archaeology Certificate. Pima Community College, Tucson. 2002

Professional Permits and Qualifications:

• Arizona State Museum Blanket Permit • Bureau of Land Management (Arizona) Archaeological Permit • Prescott and Apache Sitgreaves National Forest Archaeological Permit • Secretary of Interior qualified

Professional Experience:

Mrs. Luchetta has worked as an archaeologist since 2000. Since that time she has participated in over 800 survey, testing, and data recovery efforts throughout the American southwest and has recorded dozens of historic and prehistoric sites and features. Sarah’s Master’s thesis researched the Twinn Hawks site, an upland riverine prehistoric habitation locale located along the San Pedro River in southern Arizona. Mrs. Luchetta founded Antigua Archaeology, LLC in August of 2005 with her husband James Moses. Since that time she has supervised over 800 Class III cultural resources assessment surveys throughout Arizona and New Mexico and has authored or co- authored as many reports. As co-owner and of Antigua Archaeology, LLC Mrs. Luchetta overseas fieldwork, editing, and report preparation. She is listed on an Arizona Bureau of Land Management permit and an Arizona State Museum blanket permit.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Selected Publications:

2007 to Present:

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM01604-A (Santa Rosa North) Located at 1159 Joe and Louie Page Road, Santa Rosa, Guadalupe County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Proposed Upgrades to the Existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM01031-P (AAV) PNM Persons Located at I-25 and Rio Bravo Boulevard SE in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Cricket Communications ABQ-077 (Enchanted Hills) Located at Chopin Road NE and Offenbach Road NE in Rio Rancho, Sandoval County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility AT&T 1854_SR (BSA Philmont) Located at 17 Deer Run Road in Cimarron, Colfax County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Mayhill Located South of Highway 82 Near the Town of Hope, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04044-B (Roadrunner Ranch) Located Northwest of Ramon, Lincoln County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM03007-A (Pink Schoolhouse) Located at 38393 Highway 285 in Tres Piedras, Taos County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04070-A (Felix River Ranch) Located at 74 No Where Road in Hope, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of a Proposed Collocation to the Existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04060-A (Insite Cloudcroft) Located at 240 Mescalero Avenue in Cloudcroft, Otero County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04081-B (Double V Ranch) Located Near the Intersection of State Route 20 and County Road 1-8 Southwest of Fort Sumner, De Baca County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Spokan Located at the Northeast Corner of Highway 285 and Pueblo Road in Lake Arthur, Chavez County, New Mexico

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

James J. Moses Owner/Sr. Archaeologist Antigua Archaeology, LLC

Curriculum Vita

Education and Degrees:

• Bachelor of Arts. Anthropology and Business, University of Arizona, Tucson. 1995

• United States Peace Corps. Intensive three-month language and cross cultural training. Republic of Panama. 1999

• AutoCAD. Pima Community College, Tucson, Arizona. 2002

Professional Permits:

• Arizona State Museum Blanket Permit (2013-043bl)- Principal Investigator • New Mexico State Survey and Inventory Permit (NM-13-218-S) and Monitoring Permit (NM-13-218-M) - Principal Investigator • Current (2013-2016)Bureau of Land Management (Arizona) Archaeological Permit No. AZ-000373- Principal Investigator

Professional Experience:

Antigua Archaeology, LLC Owner/Principal Investigator, Tucson, Arizona. Manage all phases of project including fieldwork, report preparation, client relations, report production including figures and writing, budgeting, and marketing. Has successively managed over 800 projects. 2005- present

Pima Community College Staff Archaeologist/Field Director, Center for Archaeological Field Training, Tucson, Arizona. Assist in teaching archaeology students how to conduct archaeological fieldwork including survey and data recovery, direct archaeological surveys, write reports, and assist in classroom teaching. Oversaw fieldwork and authored a report for a 3,300-acre survey north of Tucson. 2004-2005

Tierra Right of Way, Ltd. Field Supervisor, Tucson, Arizona. Field Supervisor on over fifty cultural resources assessment surveys and testing efforts in Arizona and New Mexico. 2002-2004

Archaeological Research Services Field Supervisor, Tucson, Arizona. Worked on a data recovery effort of a multi-component habitation site south of Safford, Graham County, Arizona. 2001-2002

1 United States Peace Corps Community Development Volunteer, Republic of Panama. Conceived and implemented several community-based projects including the construction of a community center, beach clean-ups, and a school garden. Also taught English to over fifty children and adults. 1999-2001

SWCA, Inc. Field Archaeologist, SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson, Arizona. Field archaeologist on several testing and survey efforts. Involved in excavations at an Archaic Period habitation site excavation north of Safford, Arizona. Also excavated at Las Capas, an Early Agricultural site in the northern Tucson Basin. 1997-1999

Thunderbird Archaeology Field Supervisor, Woodstock, Virginia. Supervised archaeological surveys and testing efforts and worked as a field technician on several historic and prehistoric sites throughout the mid-Atlantic area. 1993-1997

Selected Publications:

A Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the 2400-Acre Agua Caliente Solar Project and the associated Q43 Substation, Yuma County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Approximately 500 Acres of the State Land-Portions of the AVSE and AVSE II Project Areas Located near Arlington, Maricopa County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM1 BHP Located Within the Navajo Nation at Navajo Road 4104, Fruitland, San Juan County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM4 HWY 599 Located at 7612 Baca lane in Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM1 Abiquiu Located at Mile Marker 218.8 Highway 84, Abiquiu, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Collocation Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Roswell DT Located at 200 West First Street in Roswell, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Caveman Located at 1102 Pecos Highway in Malaga, Eddy County, New Mexico

Results of an Historic Properties Treatment Plan (Data Recovery Plan) for the Mitigation of Two Archaeological Sites (AZ N:7:218 and AZ N:7:379[ASM]) located within the Granite Dells Estates Phase 1A Commercial Area in Prescott, Yavapai County, Arizona.

2 Monitoring Results at Sites AZ CC:1:79, AZ CC:2:371, AZ CC:2:374, and AZ CC:2:375(ASM) and Associated Access Roads during Construction of the Hackberry-Thatcher 69-kV Electric Sub-Transmission Line Near Safford in Graham County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of 960 Acres located along Carefree Highway in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Approximately 1,030 of the Ben Avery Shooting Facility located at 5000 West Carefree Highway (The Arizona Game & Fish Department Property) in Phoenix, Maricopa County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless LSC Tellbrook Located at 5990 Las Alturas Drive, Las Cruces, Dona Ana County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of 150 Acres Including a Proposed Haul Road Located West of U.S. Route 80 near Apache in Cochise County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of The Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility American Tower, LLC Witch Well AZAPO207C-A Located at Milepost 340.5 on Highway 191, St. Johns, Apache County, Arizona

A Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of a proposed 160-Acre Quarry Site and 10-Mile Access Road located Southeast of Florence, Pinal County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III (intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Surveys of 308.2 Acres Located on Bureau of Land Management-administered Lands (The Arizona Strip) in Antelope Valley, Mohave County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III (intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Two Parcels (Quintilla and Smugg) Totaling 576 Acres Located on Bureau of Land Management- Administered Lands (The Arizona Strip), Mohave County, Arizona

Cultural Resources Survey of 3,300 Acres of the Willow Springs Ranch Property in Pinal County, Arizona. Project No. 04-01. Pima Community College Center for Archaeology Field Training. Tucson, Arizona.

3 Emily J. Brown, Ph.D., R.P.A. 6 Herrada Way Santa Fe, NM 87508-8205 (505) 231-0157 [email protected] Education:

1994 B.A. with honors in both anthropology and music from Lewis and Clark College, Portland, OR. 1998 M.A. in archaeology from Columbia University, New York, NY. 2005 Ph.D. in archaeology from Columbia University, New York, NY.

Work Experience:

April 2005 to present: President of Aspen CRM Solutions, a cultural resource management company specializing in archaeology and historic preservation. Information on Aspen CRM Solutions can be found at www.aspencrmsolutions.com.

March 2011 to Oct 2011: Field Director at WestLand Resources, Inc. responsible for conducting all aspects of a 4440-acre survey in east central Arizona and a 30-mile-long, 300-foot-wide power line survey on Navajo Nation, BLM, and New Mexico State land between the northern edge of the Zuni Reservation and the McKinley electric substation north of Gallup, NM.

September 2002 to April 2005: Archaeologist in the Archaeology Division of the Intermountain Regional Office—Santa Fe of the National Park Service. Duties include historic structure and archaeological site condition assessment and documentation, archaeological survey, excavation, cultural resource database creation and management, electronic document archives development, stabilization treatment recommendations, Section 106 compliance, National Historic Landmark nomination preparation, interpretive exhibit design and implementation, budget and project tracking, supervision and training of student interns and field crew members, software support and training for park staff, and other aspects of cultural resource management.

July 2001 to September 2002: Archaeologist in the Architectural Conservation Division of the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office. Duties include cultural resource database creation and management, electronic document archives development, archaeological survey, historic structure and archaeological site condition assessment and documentation, resource management data collection design, stabilization treatment recommendations, Section 106 compliance, National Historic Landmark nominations, budget and project tracking, supervision and training of student interns and field crew members, software support and training for park staff, and other aspects of cultural resource management.

Sept. 1999 to Feb. 2000: Archaeology Technician at Bandelier National Monument. Duties included completing the archaeological survey at the Tsankawi Unit of the Park (including establishing GPS coordinates) and writing up the results, as well as constructing modules for the Archaeological Site Management Information System (ASMIS) database and entering data on the 2200+ sites within park boundaries for use with Environmental Impact Statements and other cultural resource management decisions.

May through July, 1998 and 1999: Archaeologist for the American Museum of Natural History at the site of San Marcos Mission, New Mexico, David Hurst Thomas PI. Responsibilities included remote sensing with a soil resistivity meter, and all aspects of excavation and processing of artifacts during a normal field season. During the summer of 1998 I also volunteered at Mesa Verde National Monument, working with the post-burn field crew in the condition assessments of archaeological sites burned in the recent fire, and in the stabilization treatments done to protect the sites from increased runoff and erosion.

School Year during 1998 and 1999: Teaching Assistant for classes taught in the anthropology department at Columbia University, specifically: Rise of Human Society, Rise of Civilization, and Introduction to Anthropology. Responsibilities included grading assigned papers and exams, leading discussion sections, occasional full lectures, and assigning final grades.

May through July 1997: Laboratory Director for the University of Arizona Archaeological Field School held in Pinedale, Arizona led by Barbara J. Mills for the excavation of the Bailey Ruin and Cothrun’s Great Kiva. Duties included all aspects of excavation in addition to those of organizing, cleaning, and packaging artifacts and teaching those techniques to the field school students, and the recovery of botanical materials through flotation.

Dec. 1996 through Aug. 1999: Independent Contractor working to update the List of Classified Structures databases for the National Park Service System Support Offices in Denver and Santa Fe, and for Dinosaur National Monument. Also worked for independent computer consulting firm constructing and managing Access databases for various companies.

Oct. 1994 through Aug. 1996: Archaeology Technician for the Southwest Regional Office of the National Park Service. Responsibilities included formatting Archaeological Survey Reports; entering data from archaeological surveys using DBase; and creating 3-D computer models of archaeological sites using Photomodeler. In particular, I was the primary person responsible for carrying out the photography, fieldwork, and data entry for the List of Classified Structures for the entire Southwest Region and for portions of the Colorado Plateau Region.

June through Sept. 1994: Student Conservation Association Volunteer at Bandelier National Monument. Projects included trail monitoring, controlled burn monitoring plot installation, visitor center display set up, data entry, and collection and analysis of archaeological artifacts from revegetation plots as part of the Section 106 compliance process.

Other Qualifications, Honors, and Awards:

2005 Listed on the Register of Professional Archaeologists maintained by the Society of American Archaeology 2004 Certificate of Appreciation from the National Park Service for assistance with emergency archaeological work associated with the 2004 flash floods. 2001 Canon National Parks Science Scholar Award ( 3 years of funding to complete Ph.D.), Access database training course, Wilderness First Aid course 2000 Special Service Award from Canyon de Chelly National Monument for condition assessment work during the summer field season 1997-1999 Three Stigler Summer Research Grants from Columbia University 1996 4-year Faculty Fellowship to Columbia University and Lorrin T. Brownmiller Anthropology Scholarship 1996 Citation of Excellence from the National Park Service Denver Office for work on the List of Classified Structures

I hold membership in the Society for American Archaeology. I served on the Board of Trustees for the Archaeological Society of New Mexico (ASNM) between 2006 and 2012, and I am chair of the ASNM annual volume editing committee. Training:

Section 106 compliance, ARPA, basic and wilderness first aid

Publications:

Brown, Emily J. 2014 “A Sound Like that of Bells”: Lithophones in the Southwest. In Enduring Curiosity, Generous Service: Papers in Honor of Sheila Brewer, edited by Emily J. Brown, Carol J. Condie, and Helen K. Crotty, pp. 57-68. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 40, Albuquerque.

Archaeological Survey of 1899 Acres at Conchas Lake, San Miguel County, New Mexico. Submitted to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Albuquerque.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Brush Removal Locations for the Bell Cattle Company, Lincoln County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Natural Resource Conservation Service.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Brush Removal Locations for the Coffee Pot Cattle Company, Lincoln County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Natural Resource Conservation Service.

2013 Guano Happens, Or, How Carlsbad Caverns Was Part of a Global Phenomenon that Influenced Organic Chemistry, Made Farmers a Voting Block, and Promoted Overseas Expansion. In From the Pueblos to the Southern Plains: Papers in Honor of Regge N. Wiseman, edited by Emily J. Brown, Carol J. Condie, and Helen K. Crotty, pp. 27-39. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 39, Albuquerque.

Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Controlled Burn Location, Lewis Cain Ranch, Sierra County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Brush Removal Locations for the Visalia Limited Partnership, Union County, New Mexico. Submitted to the New Mexico State Land Office.

2012 Archaeological Survey of Proposed Salt Basin Dunes Visitor Amenity Locations, Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Submitted to Guadalupe Mountains National Park.

Archaeological Survey of 5.75 Acres near Manuelito, New Mexico. Submitted to ERCON, Inc.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Brush Removal Locations on the Todd Poling Ranch, Union County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Natural Resources Conservation Service.

2011 Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Waterline, Llano Quemado, New Mexico, with addendum. Submitted to the Burton Engineering and the Llano Quemado MDWCA.

Archaeological Testing of LA 17051, Llano Quemado, New Mexico. Submitted to the Burton Engineering and the Llano Quemado MDWCA.

The History of the Spring Enclosure, Fort Davis National Historic Site. http://www.nps.gov/archeology/sites/npsites/fortDavisSpring.htm.

2010 Monitoring of Soils Scientists, 2010, Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Submitted to Guadalupe Mountains National Park.

Archaeological Investigation of the Spring Enclosure, Fort Davis National Historic Site. Submitted to Fort Davis National Historic Site.

Archaeological Survey of a Portion of Tobosa West, Carlsbad Caverns National Park. Submitted to Carlsbad Caverns National Park.

Archaeological Survey of 27 Acres in the Platt Historic District, Chickasaw National Recreation Area. Submitted to Chickasaw National Recreation Area.

2009 Musical Instruments in the Prehispanic Southwest. Park Science 26(1):46-49.

Ancient and Historic Sites in Death Valley National Park, in Archaeology in America: An Encyclopedia, edited by F.P. McManamon, pp. 268-271. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT.

NRCS Soil Scientist Monitoring, August 2009, Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Submitted to Guadalupe Mountains National Park.

Archaeological Survey of a Portion of the High Country, Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Submitted to Guadalupe Mountains National Park.

Archaeological Survey of Forty-Eight Fire Treatment Areas, Big Bend National Park. Submitted to Big Bend National Park.

Archaeological Testing of HB-47, Fort Davis National Historic Site. Submitted to Fort Davis National Historic Site.

Cultural Resource Survey, Embudo Valley Community Library, Dixon, NM. Submitted to the Embudo Valley Community Library.

Archaeological Investigation at Pigeon’s Ranch, Pecos National Historical Park, Year 2. Submitted to Pecos National Historical Park and the Western National Parks Association.

2008 Archaeological Investigation at Pigeon’s Ranch, Pecos National Historical Park, Year 1. Submitted to Pecos National Historical Park and the Western National Parks Association.

Archaeological Documentation, Condition Assessment, and Site Management Plan for the Creston Dike/Comanche Gap, LA 76065. Submitted to the Office of Archaeological Studies, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Archaeological Documentation, Condition Assessment, and Site Management Plan for Pueblo San Lazaro, LA 91 and 92. Submitted to the Office of Archaeological Studies, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Tribal Consultation for the Installation of the Solar Array, Headquarters, Death Valley National Park. Submitted to Death Valley National Park.

Excavation of a Hearth in the Furnace Creek Water Pipeline Corridor, Death Valley National Park. Submitted to Death Valley National Park.

2007 Archaeological Documentation and Condition Assessment of Cultural Resources in the Kelly Complex Fires. Submitted to Death Valley National Park.

Archaeological Investigation of the Area of Direct Impact for the Furnace Creek Water System Project, Death Valley National Park. Submitted to Death Valley National Park.

2006 Archaeological Survey of the Furnace Creek Wash Water System Area, Death Valley National Park. Submitted to Death Valley National Park.

2005 Research Design for the Archaeological Inventory of National Park Service and Timbisha Shoshone Co-Managed Lands, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park.

Changing Sound Production Technology of Prehistoric Flutes from the American Southwest. Voice of the Wind Vol. 3.

“They Made Many Tunes”: Southwestern Flutes in Spanish Accounts, Early Anthropological Studies, and Puebloan Mythology. Voice of the Wind Vol. 2.

Post-Flashflood Archaeological Survey and Condition Assessment of the Furnace Wash Alluvial Fan, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Post-Flashflood Archaeological Survey of the Area East of Badwater Road from the Junction with Highway 190 to Artist’s Drive. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Instruments of Power: Musical Performance in Rituals of the Ancestral Puebloans of the American Southwest. Ph.D. Dissertation submitted to the Department of Anthropology, Columbia University.

2004 Archaeological Scope of Work for the Bonnie Claire Road, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Brown, Emily J., Karen Armstrong, David M. Brugge, and Carol J. Condie, editors 2009 Between the Mountains—Beyond the Mountains: Papers in Honor of Paul R. Williams. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 35, Albuquerque. 2010 Threads, Tints, and Edification: Papers in Honor of Glenna Dean. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 36, Albuquerque.

Brown, Emily and Heather Atherton 2003 Excavation and Historic Preservation of the Old Lady Gay Ranch House, Bonito Creek, Safford, Arizona. On file at the Safford District Office of the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

2008 Archaeological Documentation, Condition Assessment, and Site Management Plan for San José de las Huertas. Submitted to the Office of Archaeological Studies, Santa Fe, New Mexico.

Brown, Emily J., and Jeff Brown 2010 Architectural Survey of the Embudo Valley Community Library, Coop Market, and Garage, Dixon, New Mexico. Submitted to Embudo Valley Community Library.

Brown, Emily J., Jeff Brown, and Richard G. Higgins 2013 National Register of Historic Places Nomination Update for the Caverns Historic District, Carlsbad Caverns National Park. On file at Carlsbad Caverns National Park and with the National Register of Historic Places.

Brown, Emily J., Carol J. Condie, and Helen K. Crotty, editors 2014 Enduring Curiosity, Generous Service: Papers in Honor of Sheila K. Brewer. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 40, Albuquerque. 2013 From the Pueblos to the Southern Plains: Papers in Honor of Regge N. Wiseman. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 39, Albuquerque. 2012 Glen Canyon, Legislative Struggles, and Contract Archaeology: Papers in Honor of Carol J. Condie. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 38, Albuquerque. 2011 Words and Sherds: Papers in Honor of Meliha S. Duran and David T. Kirkpatrick. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 37, Albuquerque.

Brown, Emily J., Richard G. Higgins, and Kim Sorvig 2012 The Grandest Thing I Ever Saw”: Historic Resource Study, Bandelier National Monument. National Park Service, Santa Fe.

Brown, Emily J., and Aleta Lawrence 2014 Archaeological Site Management Plan for Sites Associated with El Camino Real del Tierra Adentro in Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge. Submitted to the National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

2010 Archaeological Survey of a Portion of the High Country, Guadalupe Mountains National Park. Submitted to Guadalupe Mountains National Park. 2009 Archaeological Survey of Forty-Eight Fire Treatment Areas, Big Bend National Park. Submitted to Big Bend National Park.

Brown, Emily J., Anne Oliver, and Jeff Brown 2013 Preservation Work Performed on the Commanding Officer’s Quarters, Fort Craig National Historic Site, Fall 2013. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque District.

Brown, Emily J., and Mark Sechrist 2013 Archaeological Survey of a Proposed Fence Location on the Hurt Cattle Ranch, Grant County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

2012 Archaeological Survey of Proposed Pipeline, Trough, and Storage Locations on the Big Cat Ranch, Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Pipeline, Fence, and Trough Locations on the Red Hill and Lava Ranches, Hidalgo County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Pipeline, Tank, and Trough Locations on the Flying W Ranch, Luna County, New Mexico [with Mark Sechrist]. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Pipeline, Fence, Well, Tank, and Trough Locations on the Greenleaf and Rainbow Ranches, Luna County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

Archaeological Survey of Proposed Pipeline, Fence, and Brush Removal Locations on the Steeple Rock Ranch, Grant County, New Mexico. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces District.

Brown, Emily, Glenn Simpson, and Mark Mortier 2003 Report of the Archaeological Documentation and Condition Assessment for the Fall 2002 Season of the Abandoned Mineral Lands Project, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Report of the Archaeological Documentation and Condition Assessment for the Spring 2003 Season of the Abandoned Mineral Lands Project, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Brown, Emily J., Kim Sorvig, and Richard G. Higgins 2009 Recommendations on the National Register Eligibility of the Mission 66 District at Bandelier National Monument. Submitted to Bandelier National Monument.

Brown, Emily and Ron Winters 2005 Archaeological Data Recovery for LA 135868 and LA 135870 in the Tesuque Ridge Ranch Development, Santa Fe, New Mexico. Submitted to Blattland, LLC and Santa Fe Planning.

2007 Condition Assessment of 101 Archaeological Sites at Pecos National Historical Park. Submitted to Pecos National Historical Park.

Brown, Emily J., Regge N. Wiseman, and Rory P. Gauthier, editors 2014 Since Mera: The Original Eleven Bulletins with Essays and Opinions Derived from Recent Research. Archaeological Society of New Mexico Special Publications 5, Albuquerque.

Brown, Jeff and Emily J. Brown 2012 A Preservation Plan for the Commanding Officer’s Quarters, Fort Craig National Historic Site. Submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, Albuquerque and Socorro Field Offices.

Donald, Emily 2000 Determining Archaeological Site Conditions for Entry into ASMIS, 1999-2000. On file at Bandelier National Monument.

2003 The Archaeology of Music and Performance in the Prehistoric Southwest. In Archaeology and the Muse, eds. J. Jameson, J. Ehrenhard, and C. Finn. University of Alabama Press.

Donald, Emily and Heather Atherton 2001 The Salt Creek Road Archaeological Survey Completion Report. On file at Canyonlands National Park the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Donald, Emily and Glenn Simpson 2002 History, Symbolism and Mythology of Death Valley National Park’s Twenty Mule Team Wagon Set, Proceedings of the Seventh Death Valley History Conference, ed. J. Johnson. Death Valley Natural History Association.

Donald, Emily and Jim Trott 2000 Report of the Archaeological Site Conditions for the 2000 Field Season, Canyon de Chelly National Monument. On file at Canyon de Chelly National Monument and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office—Santa Fe.

Donald, Emily, Mark Mortier, and Glenn Simpson 2002 Report of the Archaeological Documentation and Condition Assessment for the Spring 2002 Season of the Abandoned Mineral Lands Project, Death Valley National Park. On file at Death Valley National Park and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Drake, Tony, Emily Brown, and Heather Atherton 2004 Archaeological Survey and Historic Preservation at the Swansea Townsite, 2003-4. On file at the Lake Havasu District Office of the Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service Intermountain Support Office, Santa Fe.

Dudley, Peter and Emily Donald 1999 Tsankawi Cultural Resources Inventory. On file at Bandelier National Monument.

Higgins, Richard G. and Emily J. Brown 2012 The Search for Battle Lines and the Union Dead, Pecos National Historical Park. Submitted to Pecos National Historical Park.

Prasciunas, Mary M., James B. Harrison III, Sara M. Dolan, Emily J. Brown, and Christine Jerla 2011 A Cultural Resources Inventory of 7,402 Acres of Arizona State Trust Land in the Northern Tortilla Mountains, Pinal County, Arizona. WestLand Resources, Inc., Cultural Resources Report 2011-41.

Winters, Ron, and Emily Brown 2007 Survey of Tract B in the Las Estrellas Development, Santa Fe, New Mexico. On file at the Laboratory of Anthropology, New Mexico.

Papers Presented:

May, 2013, Musical Instruments of the Prehispanic Southwest. Sparks Talk, School of American Research, Santa Fe, NM.

April, 2012, Vera Von Blumenthal, Rose Dougan, and Duchess Castle. Presented at the Archaeological Society of New Mexico Annual Meeting, Moriarty, NM.

May 2011, Musical Instruments of the Prehispanic Southwest. Presented at Mesa Verde National Park.

December 2009 Archaeological Investigations at Pigeon’s Ranch, Pecos National Historical Park, Year 2. Presented at Pecos National Historical Park.

June 2009 Musical Instruments of the Prehispanic Southwest. Presented at Aztec Ruins National Monument.

March 2009 A Persistent Place: Prehistoric and History of Glorieta Pass. Presented to the Military Order of the World Wars, Santa Fe Chapter, and the Westerners Historical Society.

August, 2008 Archaeological Investigations at Pigeon’s Ranch, Pecos National Historical Park, Year 1. Presented at Pecos National Historical Park.

October, 2006 Musical Instruments of the Prehispanic Southwest. Presented to the Albuquerque Archaeological Society at the Albuquerque Museum.

February, 2006 Musical Instruments of the Prehispanic Southwest. Presented as part of the Southwest Seminars series at the Hotel Santa Fe.

August, 2004 Musical Instruments of the Ancestral Puebloans. Presented at the 77th Pecos Archaeological Conference, Bluff, Utah.

March 23, 2002 The Ogre Kachina and Bourdieu: Ritualization and Performance in the Prehistoric American Southwest. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Denver, Colorado.

February 8, 2002 “Manly Men and Overcivilized Sissies”: History, Symbolism and Mythology of Death Valley National Park’s Twenty Mule Team Wagon Set. Presented at the Seventh Death Valley History Conference, Death Valley National Park.

April 22, 2001 Instruments of Power: The Archaeology of Music and Performance in the American Southwest. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans, Louisiana.

Aug. 13, 1999 The Archaeology of Music and Performance in the American Southwest. Presented at the 72nd Pecos Archaeological Conference, Show Low, Arizona.

References:

Fred Armstrong, Chief of Resources, Zion National Park, (435) 772-0188, [email protected].

Sam Denman, Museum Technician, Carlsbad Caverns National Park, (575) 234-6717, [email protected].

René Laya, Facility Manager, Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument, (406) 638- 3210, [email protected].

Bonnie Houston, Architectural Historian and Regional LCS Coordinator, National Park Service Intermountain Regional Office, Santa Fe, (505) 988-6763, [email protected].

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

DENA WHITAKER PROJECT SCIENTIST

Education

B.A. Biological Sciences College of Charleston / Charleston, SC

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Whitaker has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for a variety of projects, as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects. Ms. Whitaker has experience executing NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects throughout various regions of the United States, and specializes in the Western Regions.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

Field Reconnaissance Section 106 Compliance Informal Section 7 Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps Form 620/621 Submittals Flood Insurance Rate Maps Local Government Consultation Critical Habitat Maps Migratory Bird Evaluations Soil Characterization Native American Consultation Archaeological and Architectural Impacts FCC Memorandums of Agreement Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Land Use History Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Historical City Directories Environmental Evaluation Summaries

Additionally, Ms. Whitaker has worked in the Environmental Studies Department for College of Charleston helping researchers process biological data collected in the field.

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Survey Certification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Arizona Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training Humpback Whale Field Intensive Program, Marine and Coastal Ecology Center, Texas A&M University

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 2. Site Information – Photographs

You are required to provide photographs and maps as part of this filing. Additional site information can be provided in an optional attachment.

Photograph Requirements: Except in cases where no Historic Properties were identified within the Areas of Potential Effects, submit photographs as described below. Photographs should be in color, marked so as to identify the project, keyed to the relevant map or text, and dated; the focal length of the lens and the height of the camera should be noted. The source of any photograph included but not taken by the Applicant or its consultant (including copies of historic images) should be identified on the photograph. a. Photographs taken from the site should show views from the proposed location in all directions. The direction (e.g., north, south, etc.) should be indicated on each photograph, and, as a group, the photographs should present a complete (360 degree) view of the area around the proposed site. Please see attached Photographs, which were taken by Matt Kiviko of Trileaf Corporation on October 19, 2015, unless otherwise noted.

b. Photographs of all listed in and eligible properties within the Areas of Potential Effects. All relevant photographs are included in the attached Class III cultural resources assessment survey report.

c. If any listed or eligible properties are visible from the proposed site, photographs looking at the site from each historic property. The approximate distance in feet (meters) between the site and the historic property should be included. If any listed or eligible properties are within the APE, photos looking at each historic property should be included. All relevant photographs are included in the attached Class III cultural resources assessment survey report.

Aerial photograph of the site was obtained by using Google Earth, imagery is dated 2016.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

Please refer to Appendix C for Site Photographs Please refer to Appendix B for Site Maps NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 3. Site Information – Map Requirements

Include one or more 7.5-minute quad USGS topographical maps that:

a. Identify the Areas of Potential Effects for both Direct and Visual Effects. If a map is copied from the original, include a key with the name of quad and date. b. Show the location of the proposed site and any access roads or other easements including excavations. c. Show the locations of each property listed. d. Include keys for any symbols, colors, or other identifiers. e. Submit color maps whenever possible.

All relevant maps and figures are included in the attached Class III cultural resources assessment survey report.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

Please refer to Appendix B for Site Mpas 1/2 mile radius Visual APE

Proposed Tower 0420959E 3671917N !

Proposed access/utility

Crown Castle Legend Coyote Canyon 130 Hunter Road, Bent NM Direct APE T13S, R11E, Sections 14, 23, and 26 Project Location (Z13, NAD 83) Mescalero, NM Miles BLM USGS Quadrangle Tribal Land ¹ 0 0.25 0.5 1 Figure 1. Project Location. NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 4. Site Information – Additional Site Information

Describe any additional structures, access roads, utility lines, fences, easements, or other construction planned for the site.

The proposed cell tower site collocation is located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico. The legal description of the proposed cell tower is within the NE¼ of the SW¼ of Section 14, Township 13 South, Range 11 East (New Mexico Principal Meridian) (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]). The proposed utility and access routes are within the SE¼ and SW¼ of Section 14, the NE¼ and SE¼ Section 23, and the NE¼ of Section 26 (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]).

Crown Castle is proposing to install a new 195-foot-tall self-supporting (lattice) cell tower and associated equipment within a 5,625-square-foot lease area. Utility and site access would be via a 20-foot-wide by approximately 2.25-mile-long area that heads southeast from the lease area. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot-wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study.

The survey drawings provided by Crown Castle are included in this attachment.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

Please refer to Appendix A for Site Plans NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 5. Area of Potential Effects

You are required to provide two attachments regarding the Determination of Effect: Areas of Potential Effect and Mitigation of Effect (if applicable).

Areas of Potential Effect Guidelines: a. Describe the APE for direct effects and explain how this APE was determined.

The APE for direct effects is defined as that area that would be directly impacted by the construction and operating activities associated with the proposed undertaking. This consists of a 5,625-square- foot lease area and a 20-foot-wide by about 2.25-mile long access and utility easement. The total Direct APE is approximately 5.6 acres.

b. Describe the APE for visual effects and explain how this APE was determined.

The APE for Visual effects is defined as the geographic area in which an undertaking has the potential to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the setting is a character-defining feature of a Historic Property that makes it eligible for listing on the National Register (FCC 2004). The 2004 Programmatic Agreement (Section VI.4.a) defines the visual APE as a half mile radius (800 meters) for towers 200 feet or less in height (unless otherwise determined through consultation between the applicant and the local SHPO office). The proposed cell tower would have a maximum height of 195 feet above the ground surface. Therefore, the Visual APE is a half-mile radius.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 5. Continued

Mitigation of Effect Guidelines:

In the case of where an Adverse Visual Effect or Adverse Direct Effect has been determined you must provide the following:

a. Copies of any correspondence and summaries of any oral communication with the SHPO/THPO and any consulting parties. N/A

b. Describe any alternatives that have been considered that might avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects. Explain the Applicant’s conclusion regarding the feasibility of each alternative. N/A

For each property identified as a Historic Property in the online e-106 form:

a. Indicate whether the Applicant believes the proposed undertaking would have a) no effect; b) no adverse effect; or, c) an adverse effect. Explain how each such assessment was made. Provide supporting documentation where necessary.

Direct APE: No historic properties are present within the Direct APE.

Visual APE: No historic properties are present within the Visual APE.

No historic properties affected.

Please see the attached Class I and Class III Cultural Resource Survey.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NMCRIS No. 135465

A CLASS I AND CLASS III CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT SURVEY OF THE PROPOSED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY CROWN CASTLE COYOTE CANYON LOCATED AT 130 HUNTER ROAD, BENT, OTERO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO

TriLeaf Project No.: 619424

Prepared for: Trileaf Corporation 10845 Olive Blvd., Suite 310 St. Louis, MO 63141

Prepared by: Sarah Luchetta, M.A. Jim Moses Emily Brown, Ph.D.

Submitted by: Antigua Archaeology, LLC PO Box 4168 Prescott, AZ 86302-4168

New Mexico State Survey Permit No. NM-16-204-S001 Aspen CRM Solutions BLM Permit No.: 274-2920-15-D

May 17, 2016 (updated)

______

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract...... 3 Introduction...... 6 Project Location and Environment ...... 8 Class I-Previous Research...... 10 Survey Methods ...... 11 Survey Results ...... 11 Summary and Management Recommendations...... 11 References...... 13 Appendix A: Crown Castle Coyote Canyon site plans...... 14 Appendix B: ARMS Database Image...... 15 Appendix C: NMCRIS Investigation Abstract Form (NIAF)...... 16 Appendix D: LA 183836 site update form ...... 22

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Project Location...... 7 Figure 2. To proposed tower location/direct APE facing east ...... 8 Figure 3. To proposed tower location/direct APE facing south...... 9

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 2

______

ABSTRACT Project Title A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Crown Castle Coyote Canyon Located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico

Agency: Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

NMCRIS No.: 135465

Land Status: Private and Bureau of Land Management

New Mexico State Survey Permit Number: NM-16-204-S001

Bureau of Land Management Permit Number: All work was completed under BLM Permit No. 274-2920-15-D (Aspen CRM Solutions, Emily Brown, Ph.D.)

TriLeaf Project No.: 619424

Antigua Project No.: 2016-002.009

Project Description Antigua Archaeology, LLC conducted a Class I (records search) and a Class III (intensive) cultural resource assessment survey to determine whether construction of a proposed wireless telecommunications facility known as Crown Castle Coyote Canyon would have any direct or visual effect on historic properties. Crown Castle is proposing to install a new 195-foot-tall self- supporting (lattice) cell tower and associated equipment within a 5,625-square-foot lease area. Utility and site access would be via a 20-foot-wide by approximately 2.25-mile-long area that heads southeast from the lease area. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot-wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study.

Fieldwork Date: March 21st, 2016

Project Location The proposed cell tower site collocation is located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico. The legal description of the proposed cell tower is within the NE¼ of the SW¼ of Section 14, Township 13 South, Range 11 East (New Mexico Principal Meridian) (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]). The proposed utility and access routes are within the SE¼ and SW¼ of Section 14, the NE¼ and SE¼ Section 23, and the NE¼ of Section 26 (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]).

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 3

______

Area of Potential Effect (APE) The Area of Potential Effect for direct effect including all proposed utility and access routes is approximately 5.6 acres. The Area of Potential Effect for visual effect is a one-half mile radius around the proposed cell tower.

Area Surveyed: The entire direct APE was surveyed.

BLM Lands Surveyed: A 50-foot buffer on either side of the 20-foot-wide right-of-way was covered for all lands administered by the BLM per guidelines. That is, a corridor measuring 120 feet wide was surveyed, using 10-meter-wide transects, in all BLM lands.

Number of Historic Properties within the APE for Direct Effects: 0

Number of National Register-ineligible Archaeological Sites within the APE for Direct Effects: 0

Number of Historic Properties within the APE for Visual Effects: 0

Number of National Register-ineligible Archaeological Sites within the APE for Visual Effects: Two: LA112744 and LA183863

Management Recommendations Antigua has assessed the direct and visual effects of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility known as Crown Castle Coyote Canyon on historic properties.

Direct APE No historic properties are present within the Direct APE.

Visual APE No historic properties are present within the Visual APE.

It is recommended that the proposed undertaking proceed without further archaeological review.

In the event that the Applicant discovers a previously unidentified site within the APE that may be a Historic Property that would be affected by an undertaking, the Applicant shall promptly notify the FCC, the New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes, and within a reasonable time submit to the FCC, New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes a written report evaluating the property’s eligibility for inclusion in the National Register. The Applicant shall seek the input of any potentially affected Indian Tribe in preparing this report. If found during construction, construction must cease until evaluation has been completed.

It should also be reminded that, should archaeological remains and/or historic or prehistoric artifacts, including Native American burials and burial goods, be uncovered during the proposed construction New Mexico law requires that work shall cease in the vicinity of the discovery and that the local law enforcement agency shall be notified. The project shall be halted and the applicant shall stop all work immediately in the vicinity of the discovery and take reasonable

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 4

______measures to avoid or minimize harm to the finds. All archaeological findings will be secured and access to the sensitive area restricted. The applicant will inform the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office immediately and work to ensure that the project is in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. New Mexico Law 18-6-11.2, Section C states: “Any person who discovers a human burial in any unmarked burial ground shall cease any activity that may disturb that burial or any object or artifact associated with that burial and shall notify the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction in the area. The local law enforcement agency shall notify the state medical investigator and the state historic preservation officer.”

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 5

______

INTRODUCTION At the request of Trileaf Corporation, Antigua Archaeology, LLC (Antigua) conducted a Class I (previous records review) and a Class III (intensive) cultural resources assessment survey of a proposed wireless telecommunications facility known as Crown Castle Coyote Canyon located near Bent, Otero County, New Mexico (Figure 1). As the project is subject to review by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), it requires compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act according to the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties dated September 2004 (FCC 2004), and is therefore considered a federal undertaking as defined by 36 CRF §800.16(y), the regulations implementing the National Historic Preservation Act.

Crown Castle is proposing to install a new 195-foot-tall self-supporting (lattice) cell tower and associated equipment within a 5,625-square-foot lease area. Utility and site access would be via a 20-foot-wide by approximately 2.25-mile-long area that heads southeast from the lease area. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot-wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study (Appendix A: site plans).

The purpose of this study was to identify any historic properties/archaeological sites within the project area’s direct and visual Areas of Potential Effect (APE) and to assess the proposed undertaking’s effect on any such properties. Secretary of Interior-qualified archaeologist Sarah Luchetta, M.A. acted as the Principal Investigator for this project and James Moses as the Project Manager.

Fieldwork was carried out by Emily Brown, Ph.D. under authority of Antigua’s New Mexico State Survey Permit number NM-16-204-S001. Fieldwork within Bureau of Land Management portions was carried out by Emily Brown, Ph.D., under authority of BLM Permit No. 274-2920- 15-D (Aspen CRM Solutions, Emily Brown, Ph.D.)

This report includes a description of the project area, previous research in the project vicinity, area photographs, survey methods, results, and management recommendations. A NMCRIS Investigation Abstract Form (NIAF) was completed for this project (Appendix C) and uploaded, along with a project area polygon, to the NMCRIS/ARMS database.

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 6 1/2 mile radius Visual APE

Proposed Tower 0420959E 3671917N !

Proposed access/utility

Crown Castle Legend Coyote Canyon 130 Hunter Road, Bent NM Direct APE T13S, R11E, Sections 14, 23, and 26 Project Location (Z13, NAD 83) Mescalero, NM Miles BLM USGS Quadrangle Tribal Land ¹ 0 0.25 0.5 1 Figure 1. Project Location.

______

PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENT The proposed cell tower site collocation is located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico. The legal description of the proposed cell tower is within the NE¼ of the SW¼ of Section 14, Township 13 South, Range 11 East (New Mexico Principal Meridian) (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]). The proposed utility and access routes are within the SE¼ and SW¼ of Section 14, the NE¼ and SE¼ Section 23, and the NE¼ of Section 26 (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]) (see Figure 1). The proposed cell tower location is located on a defined ridgeline at 7,346 feet above sea level.

The proposed utility and access route follows Hunger Road, a “pack trail” as noted on USGS maps. This existing dirt trail is very steep and rugged, and climbs over 1,300 feet in elevation from the southern end at U.S. Hwy 70 to the cell tower lease area at the northern terminus. It is situated within the Basin and Range physiographic province and vegetation is characteristic of the Great Basin Conifer Woodland of the Woodland Formation. Vegetation is dominated by juniper (Juniperus sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), and pine (Pinus sp.); barberry (Berberis sp.), yucca (yucca sp.), and rabbit-brush (Chrysothamnus sp.) also are present, as are various grasses and orbs (Brown 1994, Figure 2 and 3). Understory was sparse but included various gramas and other bunch grasses, scrub oak, sotol, yucca, bear grass, and cacti. The proposed cell tower location had once burned over recently, so vegetation there is primarily grass with ground visibility at 50-75%. Elsewhere visibility averages 75-99%. Soil is a sandy clay loam with a high stone content (limestone and sandstone cobbles and gravel), especially on the steepest slopes.

Figure 2. To proposed tower location/direct APE facing east

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 8

______

Figure 3. To proposed tower location/direct APE facing south

AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE)

Direct Effect The APE for direct effects is defined as that area that would be directly impacted by the construction and operating activities associated with the proposed undertaking. This consists of a 5,625-square-foot lease area and a 20-foot-wide by about 2.25-mile long access and utility easement (see Appendix A: site plans). The total Direct APE is approximately 5.6 acres.

Visual Effect The APE for Visual effects is defined as the geographic area in which an undertaking has the potential to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the setting is a character-defining feature of a Historic Property that makes it eligible for listing on the National Register (FCC 2004). The 2004 Programmatic Agreement (Section VI.4.a) defines the visual APE as a half mile radius (800 meters) for towers 200 feet or less in height (unless otherwise determined through consultation between the applicant and the local SHPO office). The proposed cell tower would have a maximum height of 195 feet above the ground surface. Therefore, the Visual APE is a half-mile radius.

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 9

______

CLASS I-PREVIOUS RESEARCH

NMCRIS/ARMS SEARCH Prior to fieldwork the Archaeological Record Management System (ARMS) on-line database system was reviewed to determine the extent of previous archaeological work in the area. In addition, the New Mexico State Register of Cultural Properties and the National Register of Historic Places websites were reviewed (NRHP 2016). Records available at the Historic Preservation Department in Santa Fe were also reviewed, the results of which are included herein.

These inventories show that the Direct APE had not been subject to an archaeological survey prior to the current effort and that no archaeological sites or historic properties are present within same (Appendix B). No archaeological sites or historic properties have been recorded within the half-mile radius around the proposed cell tower, and none have been recorded within the Direct APE (see Appendix B). Three archaeological (3) sites have been recorded within 500 meters of the proposed utility/access easement.

LA183836 This is described as a small archaeological site previously recorded just adjacent to the proposed utility easement near the southern end, but outside of the Direct APE (see Appendix B). This is described as a single-episode, historic-period trash dump consisting of a scatter of domestic trash (see Appendix D for site information). This site was reassessed during the current survey and has been recommended ineligible to the National Register of Historic Places.

LA112744 Another site, LA112744, was recorded 150 meters west of the southern end of the access/utility easement (see Appendix B). This site is described as an historic, possibly Apache area. It has not been formally evaluated in terms of National Register criteria, and is therefore not considered an historic property for the purposes of this study (FCC 2004).

LA18230 This site is located about 500 meters west of the southern terminus of the proposed access/utility route and is described as a prehistoric Native American site with no associated features (see Appendix B). It has not been formally evaluated in terms of National Register criteria, and is therefore not considered an historic property for the purposes of this study (FCC 2004).

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 10

______

SURVEY METHODS A Class III (intensive) cultural resource assessment survey was performed over the entire direct APE on March 21st, 2016 by archaeologist Emily Brown, Ph.D. Pedestrian transects spaced at no more than ten meters were walked over the entire direct APE. Conditions during survey were clear and 55 degrees. A single transect was walked down the center of the proposed access/utility line. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot-wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study. The entire direct APE was surveyed (approximately 5.6 acres). Access to the project area was available via an established road. A digital camera was used for area photographs and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates for the project area were obtained with a hand-held Global Positioning System (GPS) calibrated to North American Datum (NAD) 83. A total of one hour was spent in the field and 100% coverage of the entire project area was achieved.

BLM Lands Coverage A 50-foot buffer on either side of the 20-foot-wide right-of-way was covered for all lands administered by the BLM per guidelines. That is, a corridor measuring 120 feet wide was surveyed, using 10-meter-wide transects, in all BLM lands.

SURVEY RESULTS A Class III cultural resources assessment survey was completed over the entire Direct APE project area and no archaeological sites, historic properties, or cultural resources were observed within the Direct APE. Native ground visibility is approximately 65%.

LA183836 LA183836 is as a small archaeological site previously recorded on BLM lands along the proposed utility easement near the southern end (see Appendix B). This is described as a single- episode, historic-period trash dump consisting of a scatter of domestic trash (see Appendix D for site information). This site was reassessed during the current survey and has been recommended ineligible to the National Register of Historic Places, which concurs with the original recommendation. A reassessment of the previously-recorded site LA183836 was performed (see Appendix D).

SUMMARY AND MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS Antigua has assessed the direct and visual effects of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility known as Crown Castle Coyote Canyon on historic properties.

Direct APE No historic properties are present within the Direct APE.

Visual APE No historic properties are present within the Visual APE.

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 11

______

It is recommended that the proposed undertaking proceed without further archaeological review.

In the event that the Applicant discovers a previously unidentified site within the APE that may be a Historic Property that would be affected by an undertaking, the Applicant shall promptly notify the FCC, the New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes, and within a reasonable time submit to the FCC, New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes a written report evaluating the property’s eligibility for inclusion in the National Register. The Applicant shall seek the input of any potentially affected Indian Tribe in preparing this report. If found during construction, construction must cease until evaluation has been completed.

It should also be reminded that, should archaeological remains and/or historic or prehistoric artifacts, including Native American burials and burial goods, be uncovered during the proposed construction New Mexico law requires that work shall cease in the vicinity of the discovery and that the local law enforcement agency shall be notified. The project shall be halted and the applicant shall stop all work immediately in the vicinity of the discovery and take reasonable measures to avoid or minimize harm to the finds. All archaeological findings will be secured and access to the sensitive area restricted. The applicant will inform the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office immediately and work to ensure that the project is in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. New Mexico Law 18-6-11.2, Section C states: “Any person who discovers a human burial in any unmarked burial ground shall cease any activity that may disturb that burial or any object or artifact associated with that burial and shall notify the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction in the area. The local law enforcement agency shall notify the state medical investigator and the state historic preservation officer.”

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 12

______

REFERENCES ARMS 2016 ARMS Database Search. Electronic documents accessed March 15th, 2016. http://stubbs.arms.state.nm.us/arms/.

Brown, David E. 1994 Biotic Communities: Southwestern United States and Northwestern Mexico. The University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) 2004 Appendix B: Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission. In Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Regarding the Section 106 national Historic Preservation Act Review Process, pp. B1-B29. WT Docket No. 03- 128, FCC 04-222, Report and Order. Federal Communications Commission, Washington, D.C.

National Register of Historic Places 2015 National Register of Historic Places Database. Electronic document accessed March 15th, 2015. http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/az/state.html

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 13

______

APPENDIX A: CROWN CASTLE COYOTE CANYON SITE PLANS

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 14 Please see Attachment 4 for Survey Drawings

______

APPENDIX B: ARMS DATABASE IMAGE

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 15

______

APPENDIX C: NMCRIS INVESTIGATION ABSTRACT FORM (NIAF) 2b. Other Permitting Agency(ies): 2a. Lead (Sponsoring) BLM Aspen CRM Solutions 1. NMCRIS Activity Agency: Federal BLM Permit No.: 274-2920- 3. Lead Agency Report No.: Communications 15-D No.: 135465 Commission N/A 4. Title of Report: 5. Type of Report A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Negative Positive Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Crown Castle Coyote Canyon Located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico Author(s) Sarah Luchetta, James Moses, and Emily Brown 6. Investigation Type Research Design Survey/Inventory Test Excavation Excavation Collections/Non-Field Study Overview/Lit Review Monitoring Ethnographic study Site specific visit Other 7. Description of Undertaking (what does the project entail?): 8. Dates of Investigation: from: 3-21-16 Crown Castle is proposing to install a new 195- foot-tall self-supporting (lattice) cell tower and 9. Report Date: March 24, 2016 (revised on May associated equipment within a 5,625-square-foot 17, 2016) lease area. Utility and site access would be via a 20-foot-wide by approximately 2.25-mile-long area that heads southeast from the lease area. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot- wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study.

10. Performing Agency/Consultant: Antigua Archaeology, 11. Performing Agency/Consultant Report No.: LLC 2016-002.009 (Antigua Project No.) Principal Investigator: James Moses Field Supervisor: Emily Brown. 12. Applicable Cultural Resource Permit No(s): Field Personnel Names: Emily Brown. NM-16-204-S Aspen CRM Solutions BLM Permit No.: 274- 2920-15-D 13. Client/Customer (project proponent): Trileaf Corp. 14. Client/Customer Project No.: Contact: Michelle Ogburn Address: 2121 West Chandler Blvd., Suite 203. Crown Castle Coyote Canyon Chandler, Arizona 85224 Phone: (480) 850-0575 15. Land Ownership Status (Must be indicated on project map): Land Owner Acres Surveyed Acres in APE Private 5.1 5.1 BLM Appx. 3 acres 0.5 TOTALS 8.1 5.6

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 16

______

Records Search(es): NMCRIS/ARMS SEARCH Prior to fieldwork the Archaeological Record Management System (ARMS) on-line database system was reviewed to determine the extent of previous archaeological work in the area. In addition, the New Mexico State Register of Cultural Properties and the National Register of Historic Places websites were reviewed (NRHP 2016). Records available at the Historic Preservation Department in Santa Fe were also reviewed, the results of which are included herein. These inventories show that the Direct APE had not been subject to an archaeological survey prior to the current effort and that no archaeological sites or historic properties are present within same (Appendix B). No archaeological sites or historic properties have been recorded within the half-mile radius around the proposed cell tower, and none have been recorded within the Direct APE. Three archaeological (3) sites have been recorded within 500 meters of the proposed utility/access easement.

LA183836 This is described as a small archaeological site previously recorded just adjacent to the proposed utility easement near the southern end, but outside of the Direct APE. This is described as a single-episode, historic-period trash dump consisting of a scatter of domestic trash. This site was reassessed during the current survey and has been recommended ineligible to the National Register of Historic Places.

LA112744 LA112744, was recorded 150 meters west of the southern end of the access/utility easement. This site is described as an historic, possibly Apache area. It has not been formally evaluated in terms of National Register criteria, and is therefore not considered an historic property for the purposes of this study.

LA18230 This site is located about 500 meters west of the southern terminus of the proposed access/utility route and is described as a prehistoric Native American site with no associated features. It has not been formally evaluated in terms of National Register criteria, and is therefore not considered an historic property for the purposes of this study.

See attached Class III report.

Date(s) of ARMS File Review 3-15-2016 Name of Reviewer(s) James Moses Date(s) of NR/SR File Review 3-15-2016 Name of Reviewer(s) James Moses Date(s) of Other Agency File Review: HPD Name of Reviewer(s) Emily Brown Agency HPD Records in Santa Fe. 3-15-2016

17. Survey Data: a. Source Graphics NAD 27 NAD 83 X USGS 7.5’ (1:24,000) topo map Other topo map, Scale: X GPS Unit Accuracy <1.0m X 1-10m 10-100m >100m b. USGS 7.5' Topographic Map Name USGS Quad Code USGS 7.5-minute Mescalero, New 33105-B7 Mexico c. County(ies): Otero

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 17

______

17. Survey Data (continued): d. Nearest City or Town: Bent, New Mexico e. Legal Description: The proposed cell tower site collocation is located at 130 Hunter Road, Bent, Otero County, New Mexico. The legal description of the proposed cell tower is within the NE¼ of the SW¼ of Section 14, Township 13 South, Range 11 East (New Mexico Principal Meridian) (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]). The proposed utility and access routes are within the SE¼ and SW¼ of Section 14, the NE¼ and SE¼ Section 23, and the NE¼ of Section 26 (Mescalero, NM. 7.5’ USGS Quadrangle [33105-B7]).

Township (N/S) Range (E/W) Section ¼ ¼ ¼ 13S 11E 14, 23, 26

Projected legal description? Yes [X ] , No [] Unplatted [ ] f. Other Description (e.g. well pad footages, mile markers, plats, land grant name, etc.):

18. Survey Field Methods: Intensity: X 100% coverage <100% coverage

Configuration: X block survey units linear survey units (l x w): other survey units (specify):

Scope: X non-selective (all sites recorded) selective/thematic (selected sites recorded)

Coverage Method: X systematic pedestrian coverage other method (describe) Survey Interval (m): 10 Crew Size: 1 Fieldwork Dates: 3-21-2016 Survey Person Hours: 1 Recording Person Hours: Total Hours: 4 Additional Narrative: 19. Environmental Setting (NRCS soil designation; vegetative community; elevation; etc.): The tower is located on a defined ridgeline at 7,346 feet above sea level. The proposed utility and access route follows Hunger Road, a “pack trail” as noted on USGS maps. This existing dirt trail is very steep and rugged, and climbs over 1,300 feet in elevation from the southern end at U.S. Hwy 70 to the cell tower lease area at the northern terminus. It is situated within the Basin and Range physiographic province and vegetation is characteristic of the Great Basin Conifer Woodland of the Woodland Formation. Vegetation is dominated by juniper (Juniperus sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), and pine (Pinus sp.); barberry (Berberis sp.), yucca (yucca sp.), and rabbit-brush (Chrysothamnus sp.) also are present, as are various grasses and orbs. Native ground visibility averages 65%.

20. a. Percent Ground Visibility: 65% b. Condition of Survey Area (grazed, bladed, undisturbed, etc.): Disturbed by road grading.

21. CULTURAL RESOURCE FINDINGS Yes, See Page 3 No, Discuss Why:

A Class III cultural resources assessment survey was completed over the entire Direct APE project area and no archaeological sites, historic properties, or cultural resources were observed within the Direct APE. Native ground visibility is approximately 65%.

A reassessment of the previously-recorded site LA183836 was performed.

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 18

______

22. Required Attachments (check all appropriate boxes): X USGS 7.5 Topographic Map with sites, isolates, and survey area clearly drawn 23. Other Attachments: X Copy of NMCRIS Mapserver Map Check X Photographs and Log Other Attachments LA Site Forms - new sites (with sketch map & topographic map) LA Site Forms (update) - previously recorded & un-relocated sites (first 2 pages (Describe): Class III minimum) report Historic Cultural Property Inventory Forms List and Description of isolates, if applicable List and Description of Collections, if applicable

24. I certify the information provided above is correct and accurate and meets all applicable agency standards.

Principal Investigator/Responsible Archaeologist: James Moses

Signature ______Date: March 24, 2016___ Title (if not PI): 25. Reviewing Agency: 26. SHPO Reviewer’s Name/Date Reviewer’s Name/Date:

Accepted ( ) Rejected ( ) HPD Log #:

Tribal Consultation (if applicable): Yes No SHPO File Location: Date sent to ARMS:

CULTURAL RESOURCE FINDINGS [fill in appropriate section(s)]

1. NMCRIS Activity 2. Lead (Sponsoring) Agency: 3. Lead Agency Report No.: No.: Federal Communications Commission N/A 135465 New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 19

______

SURVEY RESULTS:

Sites discovered and registered: 0 Sites discovered and NOT registered: 0 Previously recorded sites revisited (site update form required): 1: LA183836 Previously recorded sites not relocated (site update form required): 0 TOTAL SITES VISITED: 0 Total isolates recorded: 0 Non-selective isolate recording? Total structures recorded (new and previously recorded, including acequias): 0

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY:

Antigua has assessed the direct and visual effects of the proposed wireless telecommunications facility known as Crown Castle Coyote Canyon on historic properties.

Direct APE No historic properties are present within the Direct APE.

Visual APE No historic properties are present within the Visual APE.

It is recommended that the proposed undertaking proceed without further archaeological review.

In the event that the Applicant discovers a previously unidentified site within the APE that may be a Historic Property that would be affected by an undertaking, the Applicant shall promptly notify the FCC, the New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes, and within a reasonable time submit to the FCC, New Mexico SHPO and any potentially affected Indian tribes a written report evaluating the property’s eligibility for inclusion in the National Register. The Applicant shall seek the input of any potentially affected Indian Tribe in preparing this report. If found during construction, construction must cease until evaluation has been completed.

It should also be reminded that, should archaeological remains and/or historic or prehistoric artifacts, including Native American burials and burial goods, be uncovered during the proposed construction New Mexico law requires that work shall cease in the vicinity of the discovery and that the local law enforcement agency shall be notified. The project shall be halted and the applicant shall stop all work immediately in the vicinity of the discovery and take reasonable measures to avoid or minimize harm to the finds. All archaeological findings will be secured and access to the sensitive area restricted. The applicant will inform the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office immediately and work to ensure that the project is in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. New Mexico Law 18-6-11.2, Section C states: “Any person who discovers a human burial in any unmarked burial ground shall cease any activity that may disturb that burial or any object or artifact associated with that burial and shall notify the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction in the area. The local law enforcement agency shall notify the state medical investigator and the state historic preservation officer.”

IF REPORT IS NEGATIVE YOU ARE DONE AT THIS POINT. SURVEY LA NUMBER LOG

Sites Discovered:

LA No. Field/Agency No. Eligible? (Y/N, applicable criteria) ______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 20

______

Previously recorded revisited sites:

LA No. Field/Agency No. Eligible? (Y/N, applicable criteria)

MONITORING LA NUMBER LOG (site form required)

Sites Discovered (site form required) : Previously recorded sites (Site update form required):

LA No. Field/Agency No. LA No. Field/Agency No.

Areas outside known nearby site boundaries monitored? Yes , No If no explain why:

TESTING & EXCAVATION LA NUMBER LOG (site form required)

Tested LA number(s) Excavated LA number(s)

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 21

______

APPENDIX D: LA 183836 SITE UPDATE FORM

______

Cultural Resource Assessment Survey-Crown Castle- Coyote Canyon 22 LABORATORY OF ANTHROPOLOGY SITE RECORD 1 1. IDENTIFICATION & OWNERSHIP

LA Number: 183863 (contact ARMS for site registration) Site Update? (complete at least Sections 1-4) Site Name(s): Other Site Number(s): Agency Assigning Number:

Current Site Owner(s): Bureau of Land Management, Las Cruces Field Office Site Type: Non-Structural Occupation Type: Historic 2. RECORDING INFORMATION

NMCRIS Activity No.: Field Site Number: Site Marker? (specify ID#): Recorder(s): E. Brown Agency: Antigua Archaeology Recording Date (dd-MMM-yyyy): 21-Mar-2016 Site Accessibility (choose one): accessible buried (sterile overburden) flooded urbanized not accessible Surface Visibility (% visible; choose one): 0% 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-99% 100% Remarks: Recording Activities: sketch mapping photography instrument mapping (e.g., total station mapping) shovel or trowel tests; probes surface collection (controlled or uncontrolled) test excavation in-field artifact analysis excavation (data recovery) other activities (specify): Description of Analysis or Excavation Activities: Assessment of original documentation. Photographic Documentation: Site overview Surface Collections (choose one): no surface collection uncontrolled surface collection collections of specific items only controlled (sample: <100%) controlled (complete: 100%) other method (describe): Records Inventory: site location map excavation, collection, analysis records field journals, notes sketch map(s) photos, slides, and associated records NM Historic Building Inventory form instrument map(s) other records: Repository for Original Records: Aspen CRM Solutions Repository for Collected Artifacts: NA 3. CONDITION

Archaeological Status: surface collection test excavation partial excavation complete excavation Disturbance Sources: wind erosion water erosion bioturbation vandalism construction/land development other source (specify): Vandalism: defaced glyphs damaged/defaced building surface disturbance manual excavation mechanical excavation other vandalism (specify): Percentage of Site Intact (choose one): 0% 1-25% 26-50% 51-75% 76-99% 100% Observations on Site Condition: The site experiences light wind erosion but is overall stable and in good condition.

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 LA 183,863 2 4. RECOMMENDATIONS (for Performer/Recorder use only)

National Register Eligibility (choose one): eligible not eligible not sure Applicable Criteria: (a) (c) (b) (d) Basis for Recommendation: The site lacks historical significance and between its original documentation and this revisit, its information potential has been exhausted. Assessment of Project Impact: The site is adjacent to an existing road that would serve as a utility easement and is near where power poles would be installed. Neither would directly affect the site. Treatment Recommendations: None 5. SHPO CONSULTATIONS (for SHPO and Sponsor use only)

Sponsor NR Determination: eligible not eligible not determined Applicable Criteria: (a) (b) (c) (d) Sponsor Staff: Date (dd-MMM-yyyy): day month year Sponsor Remarks:

SHPO NR Concurrence: eligible not eligible not determined Applicable Criteria: (a) (b) (c) (d) HPD Staff: Date (dd-MMM-yyyy): HPD Log No: day month year Register Status: listed on National Register listed on State Register formal determination of eligibility State Register No.: SHPO Remarks:

6. LOCATION Source Graphics: USGS 7.5’ (1:24,000) topo maps rectified aerial photos [Scale: ] other topo maps [Scale: ] unrectified aerial photos [Scale: ] GPS unit GPS accuracy (choose one): < 1.0 m 1-10 m 10-100 m >100 m other source (describe):

UTM Coordinates (@ center of site; at least one set of coordinates required): Map-based Coordinates Datum: NAD27 Zone: E: N: GPS-based Coordinates Datum: NAD27 Zone: E: N: Directions to Site: In highway R-O-W? Town (if in city limits): State: NM County: USGS Quadrangle Name Date USGS Code

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 LA 183,863 3 PLSS Meridian Unplatted Township Range Section ¼ Sections Protracted? New Mexico T R New Mexico T R New Mexico T R New Mexico T R

7. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION

Site Dimensions: x meters Basis for Dimensions (choose one): estimated measured Site Area: sq m Basis for Area (choose one): estimated measured Elevation: feet Site Boundaries Complete? (choose one): Yes No (explain): Basis for Site Boundaries: distribution of archeological features & artifacts modern features or ground disturbance property lines topographic features other (specify): Depositional/Erosional Environment: alluvial aeolian colluvial residual no deposition (on bedrock) other process (describe): Stratigraphy & Depth of Archeological Deposits (choose one): unknown/not determined no subsurface deposits present subsurface deposits present stratified subsurface deposits present Estimated Depth of Deposits: Basis for Depth Determinations: estimated shovel/trowel tests core/auger tests excavations road or arroyo cuts rodent burrows other observations (describe): Observations on Subsurface Archeological Deposits: Local Vegetation (list species in decreasing order of dominance): Overstory: Understory: Vegetation Community (choose one or two): forest woodland grassland scrubland desert scrubland marshland other community (specify): Topographic Location: bench dune low rise ridge alluvial fan blowout flood plain/valley mesa/butte rockshelter arroyo/wash canyon rim foothill/mountain front mountain saddle badlands cave hill slope open canyon floor talus slope base of cliff cliff/scarp/bluff hill top plain/flat terrace base of talus slope constricted canyon lava flow (malpais) playa other location (describe): Observations on Site Setting:

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 LA 183,863 4 8. ASSEMBLAGE DATA

Assemblage Content (all components): Prehistoric Ceramics Other Artifacts and Materials: Lithics: whole ceramic vessels bone tools lithic debitage diagnostic ceramics faunal remains chipped-stone tools other prehistoric ceramics macrobotanical remains diagnostic projectile points Historic Artifacts: perishable artifacts non-local lithic material diagnostic glass artifacts ornaments stone-tool manufacturing items other glass artifacts figurines (cores, hammerstones, etc.) diagnostic metal artifacts mineral specimens ground-stone tools other metal artifacts architectural stone other stone tools whole ceramic vessel burned adobe diagnostic ceramics fire-cracked rock/burned caliche other historic ceramics Other items (specify):

Assemblage Size (all components): estimated frequency artifact class 0 1s 10s 100s 1000s >10,000 *Counts (if <100)

lithic artifacts (choose one): (include debitage)

prehistoric ceramics (choose one):

historic artifacts (choose one):

total assemblage size (choose one):

Dating Potential: radiocarbon dendrochronology archeomagnetism obsidian hydration relative techniques (e.g. seriation, diagnostics, etc.) other methods (specify): Assemblage Remarks: 9. CULTURAL/TEMPORAL AFFILIATIONS

TOTAL NUMBER OF COMPONENTS DEFINED: 1 COMPONENT #1 (EARLIEST) Cultural Affiliation: Basis for Temporal Affiliations (choose one): not applicable based on associated chronometric data or historic records associated diagnostic artifact or feature types based on analytically derived assemblage data or archeological experience *Period of Occupation: (*see NMCRIS Guidelines for valid periods, default occupation dates, and phase/complex names) Period Name Begin Date End Date Earliest Period:

Latest Period (if any): Dating Status: radiocarbon dendrochronology archaeomagnetism obsidian hydration relative techniques (e.g. seriation, diagnostics, etc.) other methods (specify): Basis for Cultural/Temporal Affiliation: Component Type: Remarks: *Associated Phase/Complex Name(s):

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 LA 183,863 5 COMPONENT #2 Cultural Affiliation: Basis for Temporal Affiliations (choose one): not applicable based on associated chronometric data or historic records associated diagnostic artifact or feature types based on analytically derived assemblage data or archeological experience *Period of Occupation: (*see NMCRIS Guidelines for valid periods, default occupation dates, and phase/complex names) Period Name Begin Date End Date Earliest Period:

Latest Period (if any): Dating Status: radiocarbon dendrochronology archaeomagnetism obsidian hydration relative techniques (e.g. seriation, diagnostics, etc.) other methods (specify): Basis for Cultural/Temporal Affiliation: Component Type: Remarks: *Associated Phase/Complex Name(s): 10. FEATURE DATA

(see NMCRIS User’s guide for a list of valid feature types) Reliable # Assoc. Feature Type ID ? Observed Comp. #s Feature ID, Notes

Feature Remarks: 11. REFERENCES

Written Sources of Information: Additional Sources of Information:

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 LA 183,863 6 12. NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION

The original documentation adequately recorded the site and the site map is accurate. A few additional types of artifacts were noted during this site visit that were not listed in the original report. In addition to those items recorded during the original site documentation, fragment of a white ware bowl with a gray glaze with brown streaks was present, as was a complete milk glass bottl with a metal screw cap with "CARMEX" embossed on the bottom, a metal bracket for shelving, a 1-inch metal spring, a piece of chrome vehicle trim, and a metal oil can. 13. SITE RECORD ATTACHMENTS

site location map (USGS 7.5’ topo; required) sketch map or site plan (required) continuation forms? other materials (itemize):

NMCRIS 2000 vers. 1/00 NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 6. Tribal and NHO Involvement

At an early stage in the planning process, the Nationwide Agreement requires the Applicant to gather information from appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (“NHOs”) to assist in the identification of Historic Properties of religious and cultural significance to them. Describe measures taken to identify Indian tribes and NHOs that may attach religious and cultural significance to Historic Properties that may be affected by the construction within the Areas of Potential Effects (“APE”) for direct and visual effects. If such Indian tribes or NHOs were identified, list them and provide a summary of contacts by either the FCC, the Applicant, or the Applicant’s representative. Provide copies of relevant documents, including correspondence. If no such Indian tribes or NHOs were identified, please explain.

Trileaf Corporation completed the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) on July 28, 2015, and received the notification of interested tribes on July 31, 2016. Trileaf also updated the TCNS on November 23, 2015. The attached FCC Notification email lists the Tribes identified through the TCNS process. A second notice was sent to all interested tribes/organizations on November 23, 2015. Any relevant comments from Tribes received by Trileaf will be forwarded to your office.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWER CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email ID #4295446 Date: Friday, July 31, 2015 2:01:47 AM

Dear Sir or Madam:

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the information you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter).

Persons who have received the information that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally- recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4).

The information you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. If a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCC's Declaratory Ruling released on October 6, 2005 (FCC 05-176).

1. Cultural & Historic Pres. Dept. Director Valentino Jaramillo - Pueblo of Isleta - Isleta, NM - electronic mail and regular mail

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Pueblo of Isleta within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Pueblo of Isleta has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, howeve r, must immediately notify the Pueblo of Isleta in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law.

2. THPO Gaylord Siow - Pueblo of Laguna - Laguna, NM - electronic mail and regular mail

3. Tribal Systems Administrator Eric Phillips - Ohkay Owingeh (formerly known as San Juan Pueblo) - Ohkay Owingeh, NM - electronic mail and regular mail

4. Governmental Affairs Liaison Charlie Dorame - Pueblo of Tesuque - Santa Fe, NM - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Pueblo of Tesuque requires both a street map and a topo map for EVERY proposed site. Please mark the proposed location with an arrow. Please e-mail these two maps to us at [email protected].

AFTER YOU HAVE SENT A TOPO MAP AND A STREET MAP via electronic mail ot the Tribe, if the Applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Tribe within 30 days after you e-mailed these maps to us, the Pueblo of Tesuque has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must IMMEDIATELY notify the Pueblo of Tesuque in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreementand applicable law.

Sincerely, Charlie Dorame, Acting Cultural Preservation Director [email protected]

5. Supervisory Archaeologist Kenny Bowekaty - Pueblo of Zuni - Zuni, NM - electronic mail and regular mail

6. Acting Vice President Cecil Eraicho - Ramah Navajo Chapter - Ramah, NM - electronic mail and regular mail

7. NAGPRA Coordinator Alden Naranjo - Southern Ute Tribe - Ignacio, CO - electronic mail and regular mail Details: Under the following 6 conditions, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe does not need to review the proposed tower (PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FORM 620 IS MANDATORY IF THE PROPOSED TOWER NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. IF YOU DO NOT SEND US THE FORM 620 FOR TOWERS THAT NEED TOBE REVIEWED, PLEASE CONSIDER THE MATTER TO BE AN OPEN MATTER, AND DO NOT PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL NOT MAKE ANY DETERMINATIONS UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO REVIEW THE FORM 620):

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed extensions to increase the height of already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed collocations on already existing towers. The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to beplaced on rooftops.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are within a city's limits, if the proposed structure is to be located on a disturbed road that has already been gravelled.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to be placed on pastures that have already been plowed or cultivated.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are merely extensions inheight of an already existing structure.

For all other proposed areas, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe DOES NEED a copy of the Form 620. Please send the Form 620 via regular mail and be sure to INCLUDE THE FAX # of the company in order to receive a reply:

Alden Naranjo, NAGPRA Coodinator, P.O. Box 737, Mail Stop #73, Ignacio, Colorado 81137

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Southern Ute Indian Tribe within 30 days AFTER YOU HAVE SENT THE FORM 620 to the Tribe (including color photographs and resumes), then the Southern Ute Indian Tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the site.

8. THPO Assistant Kelly Glancy - Comanche Nation - Lawton, OK - regular mail Details: The Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office does not need to review the following types of projects; those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation involving pre-existing above-ground feature additions or modifications(unless there isan increase in height), and those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation within the city limits on a previously disturbed site.

If the proposed project does not meet one of the aforementioned conditions, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office requires the following items; photographs taken of all 4 directions (north, south, east and west) from the center of the project site (where possible), legal description of the proposed site (i.e.; section, range, township, etc.) and any existing archeological/environmental reports or surveys relating to the site. We do not require, but request that you provide us with an aerial view of the proposed site if possible.

Due to the heavy volume of requests, we can no longer accept email requests.

Please send all materials to the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office, C/O Kelly Glancy, #6 SW 'D' Avenue, Suite 'C', Lawton, Oklahoma 73501 via regular or express mail, with a $500 review fee, per project (payable to the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office). Please note on the cashier s check/money order (or on an attachment), the TCNS Number/Project Name that the review fee is being provided for. Upon receipt of review fee, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office will promptly respond to your review request.

Note: If the Comanche Nation Office of Historic Preservation has commented previously on the project under requested review, inform us of the date in the body of the review request, and you will not be assessed a review fee. If you are in need of additional information you may contact us directly at (580) 595-9960 or 9618 for clarification. In addition, this message serves as the 'Official' Notice from the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office andcan be printed for your records, if necessary. Thank you!

Sincerely, Jimmy W. Arterberry, THPO

9. Darrin Cisco - Apache Tribe of Oklahoma - Anadarko, OK - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Apache Tribe of Oklahoma wishes to exercise its sovereign nation rights and participate in Section 106, NHPA Review of all TCNS/FCC tower construction activities planned or occurring in the Apache Tribe's listed Areas of Cultural Affiliation and Interest. All communications regarding this Section 106 review will be sent to the attention of Mr. Darrin Cisco at [email protected] or mailed to: Darrin Cisco, PO Box 1330, Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005. Telephone: 405-247-1066. Review, research and documentation of each compliance review will adhere to the FCC Best Practices agreement and the Apache Tribe will charge a $500.00 fee.

10. THPO Wilfred Ferris III - Eastern Shoshone Tribe - Fort Washakie, WY - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406-395-4700

Based on the location of the proposed project and the pole(s) that you will be constructing as part of the Section 106 process in our particular aboriginal homelands, we are REQUESTING TO BE CONSULTED on this proposed project.

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. All checks should be mailed to the following address:

CCCRPD-EST PO Box 87 Box Elder, MT 59521

If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected]

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

11. Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Holly B Houghten - Mescalero Apache Tribe - Mescalero, NM - electronic mail Details: The Mescalero Apache Tribe does not wish to review towers that are being placed upon existing buildings. For review of all other proposed towers located within the Mescalero Apache Tribe's traditional homelands, the Tribe will charge a $125.00 review fee. Please send this fee to the Historic Preservation Office, Mescalero Apache Tribe, P.O. Box 227, Mescalero, NM 88340. Please make the check payable to the Mescalero Apache Tribe and note on the check, or an attachment, the TCNS# or project name/numberthat the review fee is provided for. Upon receipt of the reveiw fee, the Mescalero Apache Tribe will promptly respond to your review request.

The information you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA.

12. Deputy SHPO Carol Griffith - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - electronic mail

13. Deputy SHPO William Collins - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - electronic mail

14. Architectural Program Manager Andy Wakefield - State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico - Santa Fe, NM - electronic mail

15. SHPO Bob L Blackburn - Oklahoma Historical Society - Oklahoma City, OK - regular mail

"Exclusions" above set forth language provided by the Tribal Nation or SHPO. These exclusions may indicate types of PTC wayside pole notifications that the Tribal Nation or SHPO does not wish to review. TCNS automatically forwards all notifications to all Tribal Nations and SHPOs that have an expressed interest in the geographic area of a proposal. However, if a proposal falls within a designated exclusion, you need not expect any response and need not pursue any additional process with that Tribal Nation or SHPO. Exclusions may also set forth policies or procedures of a particular Tribal Nation or SHPO (for example, types of information that a Tribal Nation routinely requests, or a policy that no response within 30 days indicates no interest in participating in pre-construction review).

Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above opened and reviewed an electronic or regular mail notification. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above:

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.5 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.3 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E

Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2297.9 meters above mean sea level

If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic mail form located on the FCC's website at: http://wireless.fcc.gov/outreach/notification/contact-fcc.html.

You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). Hours are from 8 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded.

Thank you, Federal Communications Commission

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 1270 Fairfield Road Gettysburg, PA 17325-7245

NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT ReferencePROPOSED TOWER CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION Copy INFORMATION

Date: 07/31/2015 CROWN CASTLE Reference Number: MINDI OKAI 10845 OLIVE BLVD. SUITE 260 ST. LOUIS, MO 63141

Dear Sir or Madam:

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the information you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter).

Persons who have received the information that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally-recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4).

The information you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. If a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCCs Declaratory Ruling released on October 6, 2005 (FCC 05-176).

Page 1 of 6 FCC 680 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 2 Reference Copy 1. Cultural & Historic Pres. Dept. Director - Valentino Jaramillo - Pueblo of Isleta - Isleta, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Pueblo of Isleta within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Pueblo of Isleta has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Pueblo of Isleta in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law.

2. THPO - Gaylord Siow - Pueblo of Laguna - Laguna, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

3. Tribal Systems Administrator - Eric Phillips - Ohkay Owingeh (formerly known as San Juan Pueblo) - Ohkay Owingeh, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

4. Governmental Affairs Liaison - Charlie Dorame - Pueblo of Tesuque - Santa Fe, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Pueblo of Tesuque requires both a street map and a topo map for EVERY proposed site. Please mark the proposed location with an arrow. Please e-mail these two maps to us at [email protected].

AFTER YOU HAVE SENT A TOPO MAP AND A STREET MAP via electronic mail ot the Tribe, if the Applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Tribe within 30 days after you e-mailed these maps to us, the Pueblo of Tesuque has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must IMMEDIATELY notify the Pueblo of Tesuque in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreementand applicable law.

Sincerely, Charlie Dorame, Acting Cultural Preservation Director [email protected]

5. Supervisory Archaeologist - Kenny Bowekaty - Pueblo of Zuni - Zuni, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

6. Acting Vice President - Cecil Eraicho - Ramah Navajo Chapter - Ramah, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

7. NAGPRA Coordinator - Alden Naranjo - Southern Ute Tribe - Ignacio, CO - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: Under the following 6 conditions, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe does not need to review the proposed tower (PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FORM 620 IS MANDATORY IF THE PROPOSED TOWER NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. IF YOU DO NOT SEND US THE FORM 620 FOR TOWERS THAT NEED TOBE REVIEWED,

FCC 680 Page 2 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 3 Reference Copy PLEASE CONSIDER THE MATTER TO BE AN OPEN MATTER, AND DO NOT PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL NOT MAKE ANY DETERMINATIONS UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO REVIEW THE FORM 620):

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed extensions to increase the height of already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed collocations on already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to beplaced on rooftops.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are within a city's limits, if the proposed structure is to be located on a disturbed road that has already been gravelled.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to be placed on pastures that have already been plowed or cultivated.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are merely extensions inheight of an already existing structure.

For all other proposed areas, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe DOES NEED a copy of the Form 620. Please send the Form 620 via regular mail and be sure to INCLUDE THE FAX # of the company in order to receive a reply:

Alden Naranjo, NAGPRA Coodinator, P.O. Box 737, Mail Stop #73, Ignacio, Colorado 81137

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Southern Ute Indian Tribe within 30 days AFTER YOU HAVE SENT THE FORM 620 to the Tribe (including color photographs and resumes), then the Southern Ute Indian Tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the site.

8. THPO Assistant - Kelly Glancy - Comanche Nation - Lawton, OK - - regular mail Details: The Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office does not need to review the following types of projects; those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation involving pre-existing above-ground feature additions or modifications(unless there isan increase in height), and those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation within the city limits on a previously disturbed site.

If the proposed project does not meet one of the aforementioned conditions, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office requires the following items; photographs taken of all 4 directions (north, south, east and west) from the center of the project site (where possible), legal description of the proposed site (i.e.; section, range, township, etc.) and any existing archeological/environmental reports or surveys relating to the site. We do not require, but request that you provide us with an aerial view of the proposed site if possible.

Due to the heavy volume of requests, we can no longer accept email requests.

Please send all materials to the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office, C/O Kelly Glancy, #6 SW 'D' Avenue, Suite 'C', Lawton, Oklahoma 73501 via regular or express mail, with a $500 review fee, per project (payable to the

FCC 680 Page 3 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 4 Reference Copy Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office). Please note on the cashier s check/money order (or on an attachment), the TCNS Number/Project Name that the review fee is being provided for. Upon receipt of review fee, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office will promptly respond to your review request.

Note: If the Comanche Nation Office of Historic Preservation has commented previously on the project under requested review, inform us of the date in the body of the review request, and you will not be assessed a review fee. If you are in need of additional information you may contact us directly at (580) 595-9960 or 9618 for clarification. In addition, this message serves as the 'Official' Notice from the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office andcan be printed for your records, if necessary.

Thank you!

Sincerely, Jimmy W. Arterberry, THPO

9. - Darrin Cisco - Apache Tribe of Oklahoma - Anadarko, OK - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Apache Tribe of Oklahoma wishes to exercise its sovereign nation rights and participate in Section 106, NHPA Review of all TCNS/FCC tower construction activities planned or occurring in the Apache Tribe's listed Areas of Cultural Affiliation and Interest. All communications regarding this Section 106 review will be sent to the attention of Mr. Darrin Cisco at [email protected] or mailed to: Darrin Cisco, PO Box 1330, Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005. Telephone: 405-247-1066. Review, research and documentation of each compliance review will adhere to the FCC Best Practices agreement and the Apache Tribe will charge a $500.00 fee.

10. THPO - Wilfred Ferris - Eastern Shoshone Tribe - Fort Washakie, WY - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406-395-4700

Based on the location of the proposed project and the pole(s) that you will be constructing as part of the Section 106 process in our particular aboriginal homelands, we are REQUESTING TO BE CONSULTED on this proposed project.

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. All checks should be mailed to the following address:

CCCRPD-EST PO Box 87 Box Elder, MT 59521

If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected]

FCC 680 Page 4 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 5 Reference Copy

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

11. Tribal Historic Preservation Officer - Holly Houghten - Mescalero Apache Tribe - Mescalero, NM - - electronic mail Details: The Mescalero Apache Tribe does not wish to review towers that are being placed upon existing buildings. For review of all other proposed towers located within the Mescalero Apache Tribe's traditional homelands, the Tribe will charge a $125.00 review fee. Please send this fee to the Historic Preservation Office, Mescalero Apache Tribe, P.O. Box 227, Mescalero, NM 88340. Please make the check payable to the Mescalero Apache Tribe and note on the check, or an attachment, the TCNS# or project name/numberthat the review fee is provided for. Upon receipt of the reveiw fee, the Mescalero Apache Tribe will promptly respond to your review request.

The information you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA.

12. Deputy SHPO - Carol Griffith - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - - electronic mail

13. Deputy SHPO - William Collins - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - - electronic mail

14. Architectural Program Manager - Andy Wakefield - State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico - Santa Fe, NM - - electronic mail

15. SHPO - Bob Blackburn - Oklahoma Historical Society - Oklahoma City, OK - - regular mail

Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above opened and reviewed an electronic or regular mail notification. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above:

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi Okai P.O. Box:

FCC 680 Page 5 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 6 Reference Copy Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MO Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected] Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.3 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.1 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO Detailed Description of Project (Optional): Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2,238.5 meters Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2,297.9 meters above sea level

If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic mail form located on the FCC's website at: http://wireless.fcc.gov/outreach/notification/contact-fcc.html.

You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded.

Thank you, Federal Communications Commission

FCC 680 Page 6 of 6 May 2014

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Wireless Telecommunications Bureau 1270 Fairfield Road Gettysburg, PA 17325-7245

NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT ReferencePROPOSED TOWER CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION Copy INFORMATION

Date: 07/31/2015 CROWN CASTLE Reference Number: MINDI OKAI 10845 OLIVE BLVD. SUITE 260 ST. LOUIS, MO 63141

Dear Sir or Madam:

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the information you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter).

Persons who have received the information that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally-recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4).

The information you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. If a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCCs Declaratory Ruling released on October 6, 2005 (FCC 05-176).

Page 1 of 6 FCC 680 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 2 Reference Copy 1. Cultural & Historic Pres. Dept. Director - Valentino Jaramillo - Pueblo of Isleta - Isleta, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Pueblo of Isleta within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Pueblo of Isleta has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must immediately notify the Pueblo of Isleta in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law.

2. THPO - Gaylord Siow - Pueblo of Laguna - Laguna, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

3. Tribal Systems Administrator - Eric Phillips - Ohkay Owingeh (formerly known as San Juan Pueblo) - Ohkay Owingeh, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

4. Governmental Affairs Liaison - Charlie Dorame - Pueblo of Tesuque - Santa Fe, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Pueblo of Tesuque requires both a street map and a topo map for EVERY proposed site. Please mark the proposed location with an arrow. Please e-mail these two maps to us at [email protected].

AFTER YOU HAVE SENT A TOPO MAP AND A STREET MAP via electronic mail ot the Tribe, if the Applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Tribe within 30 days after you e-mailed these maps to us, the Pueblo of Tesuque has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, however, must IMMEDIATELY notify the Pueblo of Tesuque in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreementand applicable law.

Sincerely, Charlie Dorame, Acting Cultural Preservation Director [email protected]

5. Supervisory Archaeologist - Kenny Bowekaty - Pueblo of Zuni - Zuni, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

6. Acting Vice President - Cecil Eraicho - Ramah Navajo Chapter - Ramah, NM - - electronic mail and regular mail

7. NAGPRA Coordinator - Alden Naranjo - Southern Ute Tribe - Ignacio, CO - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: Under the following 6 conditions, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe does not need to review the proposed tower (PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FORM 620 IS MANDATORY IF THE PROPOSED TOWER NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. IF YOU DO NOT SEND US THE FORM 620 FOR TOWERS THAT NEED TOBE REVIEWED,

FCC 680 Page 2 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 3 Reference Copy PLEASE CONSIDER THE MATTER TO BE AN OPEN MATTER, AND DO NOT PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL NOT MAKE ANY DETERMINATIONS UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO REVIEW THE FORM 620):

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed extensions to increase the height of already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed collocations on already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to beplaced on rooftops.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are within a city's limits, if the proposed structure is to be located on a disturbed road that has already been gravelled.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to be placed on pastures that have already been plowed or cultivated.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are merely extensions inheight of an already existing structure.

For all other proposed areas, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe DOES NEED a copy of the Form 620. Please send the Form 620 via regular mail and be sure to INCLUDE THE FAX # of the company in order to receive a reply:

Alden Naranjo, NAGPRA Coodinator, P.O. Box 737, Mail Stop #73, Ignacio, Colorado 81137

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Southern Ute Indian Tribe within 30 days AFTER YOU HAVE SENT THE FORM 620 to the Tribe (including color photographs and resumes), then the Southern Ute Indian Tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the site.

8. THPO Assistant - Kelly Glancy - Comanche Nation - Lawton, OK - - regular mail Details: The Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office does not need to review the following types of projects; those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation involving pre-existing above-ground feature additions or modifications(unless there isan increase in height), and those that have already been evaluated by the Comanche Nation within the city limits on a previously disturbed site.

If the proposed project does not meet one of the aforementioned conditions, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office requires the following items; photographs taken of all 4 directions (north, south, east and west) from the center of the project site (where possible), legal description of the proposed site (i.e.; section, range, township, etc.) and any existing archeological/environmental reports or surveys relating to the site. We do not require, but request that you provide us with an aerial view of the proposed site if possible.

Due to the heavy volume of requests, we can no longer accept email requests.

Please send all materials to the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office, C/O Kelly Glancy, #6 SW 'D' Avenue, Suite 'C', Lawton, Oklahoma 73501 via regular or express mail, with a $500 review fee, per project (payable to the

FCC 680 Page 3 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 4 Reference Copy Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office). Please note on the cashier s check/money order (or on an attachment), the TCNS Number/Project Name that the review fee is being provided for. Upon receipt of review fee, the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office will promptly respond to your review request.

Note: If the Comanche Nation Office of Historic Preservation has commented previously on the project under requested review, inform us of the date in the body of the review request, and you will not be assessed a review fee. If you are in need of additional information you may contact us directly at (580) 595-9960 or 9618 for clarification. In addition, this message serves as the 'Official' Notice from the Comanche Nation Historic Preservation Office andcan be printed for your records, if necessary.

Thank you!

Sincerely, Jimmy W. Arterberry, THPO

9. - Darrin Cisco - Apache Tribe of Oklahoma - Anadarko, OK - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Apache Tribe of Oklahoma wishes to exercise its sovereign nation rights and participate in Section 106, NHPA Review of all TCNS/FCC tower construction activities planned or occurring in the Apache Tribe's listed Areas of Cultural Affiliation and Interest. All communications regarding this Section 106 review will be sent to the attention of Mr. Darrin Cisco at [email protected] or mailed to: Darrin Cisco, PO Box 1330, Anadarko, Oklahoma 73005. Telephone: 405-247-1066. Review, research and documentation of each compliance review will adhere to the FCC Best Practices agreement and the Apache Tribe will charge a $500.00 fee.

10. THPO - Wilfred Ferris - Eastern Shoshone Tribe - Fort Washakie, WY - - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406-395-4700

Based on the location of the proposed project and the pole(s) that you will be constructing as part of the Section 106 process in our particular aboriginal homelands, we are REQUESTING TO BE CONSULTED on this proposed project.

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. All checks should be mailed to the following address:

CCCRPD-EST PO Box 87 Box Elder, MT 59521

If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected]

FCC 680 Page 4 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 5 Reference Copy

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

11. Tribal Historic Preservation Officer - Holly Houghten - Mescalero Apache Tribe - Mescalero, NM - - electronic mail Details: The Mescalero Apache Tribe does not wish to review towers that are being placed upon existing buildings. For review of all other proposed towers located within the Mescalero Apache Tribe's traditional homelands, the Tribe will charge a $125.00 review fee. Please send this fee to the Historic Preservation Office, Mescalero Apache Tribe, P.O. Box 227, Mescalero, NM 88340. Please make the check payable to the Mescalero Apache Tribe and note on the check, or an attachment, the TCNS# or project name/numberthat the review fee is provided for. Upon receipt of the reveiw fee, the Mescalero Apache Tribe will promptly respond to your review request.

The information you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA.

12. Deputy SHPO - Carol Griffith - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - - electronic mail

13. Deputy SHPO - William Collins - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - - electronic mail

14. Architectural Program Manager - Andy Wakefield - State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico - Santa Fe, NM - - electronic mail

15. SHPO - Bob Blackburn - Oklahoma Historical Society - Oklahoma City, OK - - regular mail

Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above opened and reviewed an electronic or regular mail notification. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above:

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi Okai P.O. Box:

FCC 680 Page 5 of 6 May 2014 Letter to Crown Castle Mindi L Okai Date:07/31/2015 Page 6 Reference Copy Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MO Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected] Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.3 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.1 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO Detailed Description of Project (Optional): Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2,238.5 meters Support Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2,299.2 meters above sea level

If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic mail form located on the FCC's website at: http://wireless.fcc.gov/outreach/notification/contact-fcc.html.

You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded.

Thank you, Federal Communications Commission

FCC 680 Page 6 of 6 May 2014 NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 7. Historic Properties Direct Effects

a. List all properties within the APE for direct effects.

A Class III cultural resources assessment survey was completed over the entire Direct APE project area and no archaeological sites, historic properties, or cultural resources were observed within the Direct APE. Native ground visibility is approximately 65%.

b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the APE for direct effects, not listed in part “a” (above), that the Applicant considers to be eligible for listing in the National Register as a result of the Applicant’s research. For each such property, describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63). For each property that was specifically considered and determined not to be eligible, describe why it does not satisfy the criteria of eligibility.

N/A

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 7. Continued

c. Describe the techniques and the methodology, including any field survey, used to identify Historic Properties within the APE for direct effects.1 If no archeological field survey was performed, provide a report substantiating that: i) the depth of previous disturbance exceeds the proposed construction depth (excluding footings and other anchoring mechanisms) by at least 2 feet; or, ii) geomorphological evidence indicates that cultural resource-bearing soils do not occur within the project area or may occur but at depths that exceed 2 feet below the proposed construction depth.2

A Class III (intensive) cultural resource assessment survey was performed over the entire direct APE on March 21st, 2016 by archaeologist Emily Brown, Ph.D. Pedestrian transects spaced at no more than ten meters were walked over the entire direct APE. Conditions during survey were clear and 55 degrees. A single transect was walked down the center of the proposed access/utility line. Utility poles would be placed mostly within these easement, however, several areas the utility pole route deviates from the access road. A 40-foot-wide area around each proposed utility pole was also surveyed as part of this study. A Class III cultural resources assessment survey was completed over the entire Direct APE project area and no archaeological sites, historic properties, or cultural resources were observed within the Direct APE. Native ground visibility is approximately 65%.

Please refer to the Cultural Resource Survey Report that is in attachment 5.

1 Pursuant to Section VI.D.2.a. of the Nationwide Agreement, Applicants shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to identify above ground and archeological Historic Properties, including buildings, structures, and historic districts, that lie within the APE for direct effects. Such reasonable and good faith efforts may include a field survey where appropriate. 2 Under Section VI.D.2.d. of the Nationwide Agreement, an archeological field survey is required even if none of these conditions applies, if an Indian tribe or NHO provides evidence that supports a high probability of the presence of intact archeological Historic Properties within the APE for direct effects. Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 8. Historic Properties Visual Effects

Historic Properties Identified for Visual Effects Guidelines

a. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the APE for visual effects that is listed in the National Register, has been formally determined eligible for listing by the Keeper of the National Register, or is identified as considered eligible for listing in the records of the SHPO/THPO, pursuant to Section VI.D.I.a. of the Nationwide Agreement.

No historic properties are present within the Visual APE.

Please refer to the Cultural Resource Survey Report that is in attachment 5.

b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each Historic Property in the APE for visual effects, not listed in part “a”, identified through the comments of Indian Tribes, NHOs, local governments, or members of the public. Identify each individual or group whose comments led to the inclusion of a Historic Property in this attachment. For each such property, describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63).

As of the date of this report, Trileaf Corporation has not received comments from Indian Tribes, NHOs, local governments, or members of the public that identify Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects.

c. For any properties listed in the above Historic Properties list, that the Applicant considers no longer eligible for inclusion in the National Register, explain the basis for this recommendation. N/A

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 9. Local Government

a. If any local government has been contacted and invited to become a consulting party pursuant to Section V.A. of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, list the local government agencies contacted. Provide a summary of contacts and copies of any relevant documents (e.g., correspondence or notices).

On November 5 and 23, 2015, the Otero County Planning Commission was notified of the proposed project and has been invited to comment on the proposed project’s potential effect on Historic Properties as well as indicate whether they are interested in consulting further on the proposed project. On November 5 and 23, 2015, Mr. Quairoli responded stating that there are no historic or archaeological sites that would be affected. A copy of Trileaf Corporation’s correspondence with the local government’s office is attached.

b. If a local government agency will be contacted but has not been to date, explain why and when such contact will take place. N/A

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

November 5, 2015

Otero County Planning Commission Attn: Mr. Tim Mills – Planning Coordinator 1101 New York Avenue, Room 201 Alamogordo, NM 88310 (575) 439-2619 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Mr. Mills:

Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.

Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project.

If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map, aerial photograph and a construction drawing are enclosed for your reference.

Please call me at (480) 850-0575 or email [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist Telephone Correspondence

Date: November 5, 2015 Time: 3:40 PM

Project Name: COYOTE CANYON Trileaf Project #: 619424

Subject: Certified Local Government (CLG) Response

Name: Mr. Paul Quairoli

Company: Otero County Planning Commission

Phone #: (575) 491-5942

Note: Mr. Quairoli responded to the CLG email stating that at the county level, there are no

historic or archaeological sites that would be affected by the proposed project. He did express his

concern regarding the access and utility (pole line) easements going through the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) land. He suggested that it will be beneficial to look through the RS 2477

Act and to make sure all the required permits are taken care of before the commencement of

construction. I informed him that our client is already in the process of obtaining the necessary

permits from the BLM.

Recorded by: Dena Whitaker

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Otero County Planning Commission Attn: Mr. Tim Mills – Planning Coordinator 1101 New York Avenue, Room 201 Alamogordo, NM 88310 (575) 439-2619 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Mr. Mills:

This letter was originally sent to you on November 5, 2015. The original letter stated that the proposed tower height is 195 feet. However, the letter failed to mention that the overall height of tower is not to exceed 199 feet.

Please let us know if this updated information will affect the original response dated November 5, 2015. If the updated response is needed, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking.

Please call me at (480) 850-0575 or email [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist Dena Whitaker

From: Paul Quairoli Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 11:15 AM To: Dena Whitaker Cc: Tim Mills Subject: Re: Update/Missed information in first letter: Trileaf/Crown Castle #619424 Bent, NM Cell Tower Project

Dena,

I'm not sure if Tim got back to you, but he is our finance director and doesn't have any dealings with these types of projects or planning process.

The County does not have a permit department, that would be NMCID, FCC and FAA since you are in a glide slope for the airport for construction. The County only requires that you follow the flood damage prevention ordinance which is where I come into the process.

Thanks,

Paul Quairoli

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID 575-491-5942

Dena Whitaker wrote:

Tim,

Good morning. When I first sent the letter on 11/5, the letter stated the tower height was 195. I forgot to also mention that the tower height is not to exceed 199 feet. Please see the attached letter, and let me know if you need additional information.

I apologize for any inconvenience.

Thank you,

Dena Whitaker

Trileaf Corporation

(480) 850-0575 [email protected] 1 NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 10. Other Consulting Parties and Public Notice

List additional consulting parties that were invited to participate by the Applicant, or independently requested to participate. Provide any relevant correspondence or other documents.

On November 5and 23, 2015, the Tularosa Basin Historical Society was notified of the proposed project and has been invited to comment on the proposed project’s potential effect on Historic Properties as well as indicate whether they are interested in consulting further on the proposed project. On November 6, 2015, Ms. Killer responded stating that there are no issues with the site. She did however, expressed possible issue on the north side of the Tularosa Creek and Highway #70, which is an active archaeological dig site. Information regarding the proposition for the communications site has also been forwarded to the organization performing the archaeological dig. A copy of Trileaf Corporation’s correspondence with the historical society is attached.

You are required to provide a Public Notice Attachment.

Attached, please find a copy of a legal notice regarding the proposed telecommunications tower construction that was posted in the Alamogordo News on November 26, 2015. As of the date of this submission packet, no comments regarding this notice have been received by Trileaf Corporation. Should a response be received, copies will be forwarded to all consulting parties as an addendum to this submission packet.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

November 5, 2015

Tularosa Basin Historical Society 1301 N. White Sands Boulevard Alamogordo, NM 88310 (575) 434-4438 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

To whom it may concern:

Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.

Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project.

If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map, aerial photograph and a construction drawing are enclosed for your reference.

Please call me at (480) 850-0575 or email [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist Dena Whitaker

From: TBHS Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 1:12 PM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: RE: Trileaf/Crown Castle #619424 Bent, NM Cell Tower Project

Hello, looking at your maps, if I am reading them correctly, I do not see any issues that I am aware of with your site. Round Mountain is a historic site but I do not think it will have any issue with your location; also Blazer’s Mill, may have some issue but I believe it is private property and I cannot speak for the owners. The only other area that may have an issue with the activity you are planning is on the North side of the Tularosa creek and Highway #70, and that is the archeological dig that is being performed by Four Corners Research, and I have forwarded your email to their address.

Jean Ann Killer, Curator Tularosa Basin Historical Society 1301 N. White Sands Blvd. Alamogordo, NM 88310 [email protected] 575-434-4438

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 10:55 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Trileaf/Crown Castle #619424 Bent, NM Cell Tower Project

To whom it may concern,

Trileaf Corporation is performing a NEPA Checklist review for a communications site in Bent, New Mexico. We would appreciate any help that you can provide in identifying historic/archaeological sites nearby that the Tularosa Basin Historical Society would like us to consider before we submit to SHPO. Please see the attached letter for further information.

If you have any questions I can be reached at [email protected] or 480-850-0575.

Thank you for your time, and have a great day!

Dena Whitaker Environmental Biologist

2121 W. Chandler Blvd., Suite 203 Chandler, AZ 85224 Email: [email protected] Phone: (480) 850-0575 Fax: (480) 850-0578

1 Dena Whitaker

From: David Greenwald Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 12:48 PM To: Dena Whitaker Cc: 'TBHS' Subject: Cell tower north of Bent

Hello Dena:

Your request for information was passed along to me. I am familiar with the site location (I believe the proposed tower location is on land owned by the Hile’s or perhaps it has recently changed hands). It is NOT in Coyote Canyon and actually located at some distance from it. Dry Canyon is located to the north of Smith Well as shown on the enclosed map and of course Tularosa Canyon to the south. This property bordered against our ranch in Dry Canyon to the north. I am not aware of archaeological or cultural resources on that property although the area below it in Tularosa Canyon and Nogal Canyon are rich in cultural resources dating from as recently as the early 1900s to as late as Paleoindian times. Many of the sites are not recorded as they are on private property but the archaeological resources are highly significant. The location of the tower would generate a visual impact on the canyon and on places of cultural significance such as Round Mountain, recognized by its association with important events that occurred in the area during the earliest period settlement in the 1860s. Blazer’s Mill is also nearby. These resources may be considered TCPs with strong associations with Hispanic and Native American populations. There are two “unofficial” archaeological districts in this area. The Bent Community includes numerous small pit house sites and masonry roomblocks (10 – 12 rooms). To the west is the Creekside Village Community, an early pit house village that includes irrigation ditches and other water control features (reservoirs, developed springs, and water collection systems) built as early as AD 700. Thus far, Tularosa Canyon is the only area known in the Tularosa Basin to have great kivas, found in association with each of these archaeological districts. Five have been identified here. Much of the work is very recent and has not yet been documented through publication or official site records in the NMCRIS record system. To the east on the Mescalero Apache Indian Reservation in Tularosa Canyon, archaeological sites are numerous. I often find indications of the very subtle remains of Apache use of the area when I am exploring areas west of the reservation boundary. This was the homelands of the Mescalero Apache and their sites are very difficult for many archaeologists to identify yet they are common across the landscape. I hope you find this helpful and that caution is exercised during any ground disturbing activities.

Regards,

1

2121 West Chandler Boulevard, Suite 203, Chandler, Arizona 85224 - 480.850.0575 - www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Tularosa Basin Historical Society Attn: Ms. Jean Ann Killer - Curator 1301 N. White Sands Boulevard Alamogordo, NM 88310 (575) 434-4438 [email protected]

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W

Dear Ms. Killer:

This letter was originally sent to you on November 5, 2015. The original letter stated that the proposed tower height is 195 feet. However, the letter failed to mention that the overall height of tower is not to exceed 199 feet.

Please let us know if this updated information will affect the original response dated November 5, 2015. If the updated response is needed, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking.

Please call me at (480) 850-0575 or email [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Dena Whitaker Project Scientist Dena Whitaker

From: David Greenwald Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 9:07 AM To: Dena Whitaker; 'TBHS' Subject: RE: Update/Missed information from first letter: Trileaf/Crown Castle #619424 Bent, NM Cell Tower Project

Hello Dena. The excavations that Ms. Killer refers to are being done by Jornada Research Institute, not Four Corners Research. JRI is excavating a large pit house village with a great kiva (first one documented in the Tularosa Basin), irrigation system, water collection system (reservoir and ditches), and a culturally enhanced spring. The site dates somewhere in the neighborhood of A.D. 675 to 800 (based on 2 C‐14 dates and pottery). Dendro samples have been recovered from the kiva but have not been submitted for analysis yet. To the east (near the cell tower location but above the floodplain on the north side of the Rio Tularosa) are other sites with probable great kivas. These have not been tested or documented in any manner other than their surface expressions.

Hope this is helpful. Dave

From: Dena Whitaker [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 8:50 AM To: TBHS Cc: David Greenwald Subject: Update/Missed information from first letter: Trileaf/Crown Castle #619424 Bent, NM Cell Tower Project

Ms. Killer,

Good morning. When I first sent the letter on 11/5, the letter stated the tower height was 195. I forgot to also mention that the tower height is not to exceed 199 feet. Please see the attached letter, and let me know if you need additional information.

I apologize for any inconvenience. Thank you,

Dena Whitaker Trileaf Corporation (480) 850-0575 [email protected]

1

NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620 Approved by OMB 3060-1039 See instructions for Public burden estimates

Attachment 11. SHPO Specific Forms

The Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey completed and is presented in Attachment 5.

Applicant’s Name: Crown Castle Project Name: Coyote Canyon Project Number: 619424 FCC Form 620

Dena Whitaker

From: [email protected] Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 9:45 AM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: Section 106 New Filing Submitted- Email ID #1535175

The following new Section 106 filing has been submitted:

File Number: 0007061822 TCNS Number: 129798 Purpose: New Tower Submission Packet Notification Date: 7AM EST 12/15/2015 Applicant: Crown Castle Consultant: Aztlan Archaeology, Inc., on behalf of Trileaf Corporation Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: No Site Name: Coyote Canyon Site Address: North of 12 Hunter Road Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Site Coordinates: 33-10-59.3 N, 105-50-52.1 W City: Bent County: OTERO State:NM Lead SHPO/THPO: State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico

Consultant Contact Information: Name: Aztlan Archaeology, Inc., on behalf of Trileaf Corporation Title: PO Box: Address: 1026 N Columbus Blvd City: Tuscon State: AZ Zip: 85711 Phone: 502-620-1480 Fax: Email: [email protected]

NOTICE OF FRAUDULENT USE OF SYSTEM, ABUSE OF PASSWORD AND RELATED MISUSE Use of the Section 106 system is intended to facilitate consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable laws. Any person having access to Section 106 information shall use it only for its intended purpose. Appropriate action will be taken with respect to any misuse of the system.

1

Dena Whitaker

From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2016 11:15 AM To: Dena Whitaker Subject: Section 106 Notification of SHPO/THPO Concurrence- Email ID #1790237

This is to notify you that the Lead SHPO/THPO has concurred with the following filing: Date of Action: 06/03/2016 Direct Effect: No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE) Visual Effect: No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE) Comment Text: No effect for both direct and visual effect APEs.

File Number: 0007061822 TCNS Number: 129798 Purpose: Update Original Purpose: New Tower Submission Packet Notification Date: 7AM EST 05/25/2016 Applicant: Crown Castle Consultant: Antigua Archaeology, LLC, on behalf of Trileaf Corporation Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: No Site Name: Coyote Canyon Site Address: North of 12 Hunter Road Detailed Description of Project: Site Coordinates: 33-10-59.3 N, 105-50-52.1 W City: Bent County: OTERO State:NM Lead SHPO/THPO: State Historic Preservation Office of New Mexico

NOTICE OF FRAUDULENT USE OF SYSTEM, ABUSE OF PASSWORD AND RELATED MISUSE Use of the Section 106 system is intended to facilitate consultation under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable laws. Any person having access to Section 106 information shall use it only for its intended purpose. Appropriate action will be taken with respect to any misuse of the system.

1 Appendix F Native American Correspondence Tribal Summary Table Site Name: COYOTE CANYON Client #: BUN 821945 TCNS #: 129798 TCNS Notification Date: July 31, 2015 Request from FCC Standing Agreements Tribe TCNS auto-reply Follow Up(s) Final Reply Tribe Referral & Comments

No response within 30 days of TCNS notification, no interest. Pueblo of Isleta 12/23/2015 - Per NoO Requests inadvertent discovery notification

7/29/2015 - No interest in this site. Pueblo of Laguna Requests inadvertent discovery notification

11/23/2015 Referred - Ohkay Owingeh (formerly 12/1/2015 - Sent 12/17/2015 Referred known as San Juan Pueblo) updated project Clearance information 1/6/16 Email street and topo map then if 11/23/2015 Referred - no response within 30 days, no 12/1/2015 - Sent 12/31/2015 Pueblo of Tesuque Referred interest. Requests inadvertent updated project clearance discovery notification. information 1/20/16 11/23/2015 12/1/2015 - Sent Pueblo of Zuni Review Fee 12/3/2015 - No effect. updated project information 11/23/2015 12/2/2015 - No interest or comment on 12/1/2015 - Sent Ramah Navajo Chapter the proposed project. Requests inadvertant updated project discovery notification. information Tribal Summary Table Site Name: COYOTE CANYON Client #: BUN 821945 TCNS #: 129798 TCNS Notification Date: July 31, 2015 Request from FCC Standing Agreements Tribe TCNS auto-reply Follow Up(s) Final Reply Tribe Referral & Comments

Mail copy of the Form 620. No response within 30 days after the Form 620 has been sent, including color photo graphs and resumes, then no interest. Does NOT need to review proposed collocations on Southern Ute Tribe already existing towers or rooftops. 11/23/2015 12/23/2015 - Per NoO Does NOT need to review structures within city limits and on a disturbed road that has already been graveled, or in pastures that have already been plowed or cultivated.

11/23/2015 $500 review fee. Archeological 12/1/2015 - Sent 12/4/2015 - No properties affected by this Comanche Nation report, photos (N,S,E,W), Legal updated project undertaking. Description, and aerial photo information 1/6/2016 - Concurs that construction of 11/23/2015 proposed project will not adversely affect Review Fee $500 for all projects. 12/1/2015 - Sent any sacred sites, traditional cultural Referred - Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Email topo and aerial maps. updated project properties or any other historic property of 12/31/2015 information interest. Requests inadvertent discovery notification. 12/17/2105 - FINDING OF NO CULTURAL PROPERTIES - The 11/23/2015 potential for cultural resources to be $400 review fee. Requests to be 12/1/2015 - Sent Eastern Shoshone Tribe Review Fee present within or near your proposed consulted. updated project project is low and should not result in an information adverse effect. Requests inadvertent discovery notification. Tribal Summary Table Site Name: COYOTE CANYON Client #: BUN 821945 TCNS #: 129798 TCNS Notification Date: July 31, 2015 Request from FCC Standing Agreements Tribe TCNS auto-reply Follow Up(s) Final Reply Tribe Referral & Comments

12/14/2015 - No immediate concerns 11/23/2015 $125 review fee. No interest in within the project area. No adverse effects 12/1/2015 - Sent Mescalero Apache Tribe Collocations on a building with no to cultural resources or areas of interest. updated project ground disturbance. Requests inadvertent discovery information notification. Erika Diak

From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 4:39 PM To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 129798) - Email ID #4297453

Dear Mindi Okai,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from THPO Gaylord Siow of the Pueblo of Laguna in reference to Notification ID #129798:

We have no interest in this site. However, if the Applicant discovers archaeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should immediately stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and the Tribe.

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314‐997‐6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER ‐ Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.5 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.3 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E

1 Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2297.9 meters above mean sea level

2

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Ohkay Owingeh Mr. Eric Phillips P.O. Box 1099 Ohkay Owingeh, NM 87566

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Phillips:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The site location maps are enclosed for your reference. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2297.9 meters above mean sea level

2

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Ohkay Owingeh Mr. Eric Phillips P.O. Box 1099 Ohkay Owingeh, NM 87566

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Phillips:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts - Email ID #17110 Date: Thursday, December 17, 2015 8:03:32 AM

Verizon Wireless Mindi L Okai 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 St. Louis, MO 63141

Dear Applicant:

This letter addresses the proposed communications facilities listed below that you have referred to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively Indian Tribes), and Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA). Consistent with the procedures outlined in the Commission's recent Declaratory Ruling (1), we have contacted the Indian Tribes or NHOs identified in the attached Table for the projects listed in the attached Table. You referred these projects to us between 12/10/2015 and 12/17/2015. Our contact with these Tribal Nations or NHOs was sent on 12/17/2015.

Thus, as described in the Declaratory Ruling (2), if you or Commission staff do not receive a statement of interest regarding a particular project from any Tribe or NHO within 20 calendar days of 12/17/2015, your obligations under Section IV of the NPA with respect to these Tribal Nations or NHOs are complete(3). If aTribal Nation or NHO responds that it is interested in participating within the 20 calendar day period, the Applicant must involve it in the review as set forth in the NPA, and may not begin construction until the process set forth in the NPA is completed.

You are reminded that Section IX of the NPA imposes independent obligations on an Applicant when a previously unidentified site that may be a historic property, including an archeological property, is discovered during construction or after the completion of review(4). In such instances, the Applicant must cease construction and promptly notify, among others, any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO. A Tribal Nation's or NHO's failure to express interest in participating in pre-construction review of an undertaking does not necessarily mean it is not interested in archeological properties or human remains that may inadvertently be discovered during construction. Hence, an Applicant is still required to notify any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO of any such finds pursuant to Section IX or other applicable law.

Sincerely, Dan Abeyta Assistant Chief Spectrum and Competition Policy Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

______1) See Clarification of Procedures for Participation of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian Organizations Under the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, Declaratory Ruling, FCC 05-176 (released October 6, 2005) (Declaratory Ruling). 2) Id S 8-10. 3) We note that, under the Declaratory Ruling, an expression of interest by an Indian Tribe or NHO addressed solely to the Commission staff during the 20-day period is sufficient even if it does not contact the Applicant. 4) Id at S 11.

LIST OF PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T14S R15E Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma

TCNS# 133121 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 2001 North Orchard St, Chicago, IL Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S33 T40N R14E Project Description: Project is a collocation with No ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe Name: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri

TCNS# 133127 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 1465 3 Mile Road NW, Grand Rapids, MI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S2 T7N R12W Tribe Name: Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe Name: Huron Potawatomi

TCNS# 133141 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 4628 Cedar Creek Road, Grafton, WI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S11 T10N R21E Tribe Name: Forest County Potawatomi Community

TCNS# 129798 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Tribe Name: Ohkay Owingeh (formerly known as San Juan Pueblo)

TCNS# 130609 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 7700 Portland Avenue, Wauwatosa, WI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S28 T7N R21E Project Description: Project is a collocation with NO Ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Ho-Chunk Nation Tribe Name: Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska

TCNS# 130609 Referred Date: 12/17/2015 Location: 7700 Portland Avenue, Wauwatosa, WI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S28 T7N R21E Project Description: Project is a collocation with NO Ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 131047 Referred Date: 12/17/2015 Location: 383 West Armitage Avenue, Elmhurst, IL Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S35 T40N R11E Project Description: Project is a collocation with NO Ground disturbance. Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 130813 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 7789 Northwest Beaver Drive, Johnston, IA Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S36 T80N R25W Tribe Name: Iowa Tribe of Kansas & Nebraska

TCNS# 131751 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 3575 156 Ave SE, Casselton, ND Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S36 T140N R52W Project Description: Project is a collocation with less than 500 square feet of ground disturbance in already disturbed ground. Tribe Name: Crow Creek Sioux Tribal Council

TCNS# 132889 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 12205 North Tangerine Farms Road, Marama, AZ Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S34 T11S R11E Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma

TCNS# 132924 Referred Date: 12/16/2015 Location: 2265 West Midvalley Road, Cedar City, UT Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S16 T35S R11W

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Pueblo of Tesuque Mr. Charlie Dorame Route 5, Box 360-T Santa Fe, NM 87501

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Dorame:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The site location maps are enclosed for your reference. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Pueblo of Tesuque Mr. Charlie Dorame Route 5, Box 360-T Santa Fe, NM 87501

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Dorame:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Proposed Construction of Communications Facilities Notification of Final Contacts - Email ID #17185 Date: Thursday, December 31, 2015 8:03:23 AM

T-Mobile Mindi L Okai 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 St. Louis, MO 63141

Dear Applicant:

This letter addresses the proposed communications facilities listed below that you have referred to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) for purposes of contacting federally recognized Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively Indian Tribes), and Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), as specified by Section IV.G of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (NPA). Consistent with the procedures outlined in the Commission's recent Declaratory Ruling (1), we have contacted the Indian Tribes or NHOs identified in the attached Table for the projects listed in the attached Table. You referred these projects to us between 12/24/2015 and 12/31/2015. Our contact with these Tribal Nations or NHOs was sent on 12/31/2015.

Thus, as described in the Declaratory Ruling (2), if you or Commission staff do not receive a statement of interest regarding a particular project from any Tribe or NHO within 20 calendar days of 12/31/2015, your obligations under Section IV of the NPA with respect to these Tribal Nations or NHOs are complete(3). If aTribal Nation or NHO responds that it is interested in participating within the 20 calendar day period, the Applicant must involve it in the review as set forth in the NPA, and may not begin construction until the process set forth in the NPA is completed.

You are reminded that Section IX of the NPA imposes independent obligations on an Applicant when a previously unidentified site that may be a historic property, including an archeological property, is discovered during construction or after the completion of review(4). In such instances, the Applicant must cease construction and promptly notify, among others, any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO. A Tribal Nation's or NHO's failure to express interest in participating in pre-construction review of an undertaking does not necessarily mean it is not interested in archeological properties or human remains that may inadvertently be discovered during construction. Hence, an Applicant is still required to notify any potentially affected Tribal Nation or NHO of any such finds pursuant to Section IX or other applicable law.

Sincerely, Dan Abeyta Assistant Chief Spectrum and Competition Policy Division Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

______1) See Clarification of Procedures for Participation of Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian Organizations Under the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, Declaratory Ruling, FCC 05-176 (released October 6, 2005) (Declaratory Ruling). 2) Id S 8-10. 3) We note that, under the Declaratory Ruling, an expression of interest by an Indian Tribe or NHO addressed solely to the Commission staff during the 20-day period is sufficient even if it does not contact the Applicant. 4) Id at S 11.

LIST OF PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS TCNS# 123748 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 2202 Darwin Rd, Madison, WI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S30 T8N R10E Project Description: Raw Land New Build. Tribe Name: Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe Name: Upper Sioux Community of Minnesota

TCNS# 123748 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 2202 Darwin Rd, Madison, WI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S30 T8N R10E Project Description: Raw Land New Build. Tribe Name: Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin Tribe Name: Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians

TCNS# 129798 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Pueblo of Tesuque

TCNS# 133367 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 31645 Industrial Avenue, Parker, AZ Detailed Description of Project: Proposed replacement of MW at CL 150ft and panel antennas at 232ft7in on an existing 255ft self-support telecommunications tower. In addition, proposed removal of MW at 92ft 2in. No additional ground needed. Legal Description: S27 T8N R19W Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Tribe Name: Hualapai Tribe

TCNS# 133382 Referred Date: 12/31/2015 Location: Logan Road, Imperial, PA Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: No Township Found.

Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 133441 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 1525 N. 67th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ Detailed Description of Project: Proposed 85' monopole within a new 50' by 50' lease area. Access and utilities proposed to be granted within a new 20' wide easement extending west. Tribe Name: Apache Tribe of Oklahoma

TCNS# 133576 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 6451 93rd Place, Oak Lawn, IL Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S6 T37N R13E Tribe Name: Forest County Potawatomi Community Tribe Name: Sac and Fox Nation of Missouri

TCNS# 131176 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: West Boehm Road, West Branch, MI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S15 T21N R2E

Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 131350 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 5383 Riverview Road, Bridgeport, MI Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S26 T11N R5E Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 131451 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: S State Rd 3, Scottsburg, IN Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: No Township found Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 132284 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 600 Mountain Avenue, Berkeley Heights, NJ Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: No township found Tribe Name: Wyandotte Nation

TCNS# 132434 Referred Date: 12/30/2015 Location: 3003 E. Harmony Road, Fort Collins, CO

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Pueblo of Zuni Mr. Kurt Dongoske P.O. Box 1149 Zuni, NM 87327

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Dongoske:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The archeological report is enclosed for your reference. The $100 review fee is also enclosed. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Pueblo of Zuni Mr. Kurt Dongoske P.O. Box 1149 Zuni, NM 87327

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Dongoske:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Ramah Navajo Chapter Mr. Cecil Eriacho HC 61, Box 13 HCR 61 Ramah, NM 87321

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Eriacho:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The site location maps are enclosed for your reference. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 129798) - Email ID #4682851 Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 3:27:30 PM

Dear Mindi Okai,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from Sr. Com. Dev. Sp. Debbie Islam of the RNC CDD in reference to Notification ID #129798:

We have no interest in this site. However, if the Applicant discovers archaeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should immediately stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and the Tribe.

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.3 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.1 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO

Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2299.2 meters above mean sea level

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Ramah Navajo Chapter Mr. Cecil Eriacho HC 61, Box 13 HCR 61 Ramah, NM 87321

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Eriacho:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 129798) - Email ID #4682851 Date: Monday, August 22, 2016 3:27:30 PM

Dear Mindi Okai,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from Sr. Com. Dev. Sp. Debbie Islam of the RNC CDD in reference to Notification ID #129798:

We have no interest in this site. However, if the Applicant discovers archaeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should immediately stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and the Tribe.

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.3 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.1 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO

Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2299.2 meters above mean sea level

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Southern Ute Tribe Mr. Alden Naranjo P.O. Box 737, Mail Stop #73 Ignacio, CO 81137

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Naranjo:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The Form 620/621, archeological report, site maps and photos are enclosed for your reference. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Comanche Nation Ms. Kelly Glancy PO BOX 908 Lawton, OK 73501

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Ms. Glancy:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The archeological report, site location maps and photos are enclosed for your reference. The $500 review fee is also enclosed. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Comanche Nation Ms. Kelly Glancy PO BOX 908 Lawton, OK 73501

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Ms. Glancy:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Mr. Darrin Cisco PO Box 1330 Anadarko, OK 73005

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Cisco:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The site location maps are enclosed for your reference. The $500 review fee is in the mail. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Apache Tribe of Oklahoma Mr. Darrin Cisco PO Box 1330 Anadarko, OK 73005

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Cisco:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: Apache Tribe Of Oklahoma To: Mindi Okai Subject: Re: TCNS # 129798 - Apache Tribe of Oklahoma - Update Date: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 11:52:42 PM

We have received the information for TCNS # 129798 on November 30, 2015.

The Apache Tribe of Oklahoma has reviewed all available information regarding TCNS # 129798 and concurs that construction of this proposed project will not adversely affect any sacred sites, traditional cultural properties or any other historic property of interest to the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma.

However, in the event of any inadvertent discovery of any American Indian remains, funerary objects, or objects of cultural patrimony, please contact the Apache Tribe of Oklahoma immediately.

Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and provide comments.

Darrin Cisco Apache Tribe of Oklahoma P.O. Box 1330 Anadarko, OK 73005 Phone: (405) 247-7494 Fax: (405) 247-9872

On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 2:21 PM, Mindi Okai wrote:

Hello,

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Ste. 260 St. Louis, MO 63141 Office: (314) 997-6111 Fax: (314) 997 - 8066 Erika Diak

From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 8:05 AM To: tribal Cc: [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 129798) - Email ID #4297115

Dear Mindi Okai,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from THPO Wilfred Ferris III of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe in reference to Notification ID #129798:

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406‐395‐4700

Based on the location of the proposed project and the pole(s) that you will be constructing as part of the Section 106 process in our particular aboriginal homelands, we are REQUESTING TO BE CONSULTED on this proposed project.

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. Please mail checks to: CCCRPD‐EST; PO Box 87; Box Elder, MT 59521. If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected].

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai

1 Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314‐997‐6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER ‐ Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.5 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.3 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2297.9 meters above mean sea level

2

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Eastern Shoshone Tribe Mr. Wilford J. Ferris, III P.O. Box 538 Ft. Washakie, WY 82514

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Ferris, III:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The archeological report, site location maps and photos are enclosed for your reference. The $400 review fee is in the mail. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Eastern Shoshone Tribe Mr. Wilford J. Ferris, III P.O. Box 538 Ft. Washakie, WY 82514

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Mr. Ferris, III:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

Shoshone Finance P.O. Box 538 Fort Washakie, WY 82514 (307) 332-6804/3043 Fax: (307) 332-0429

To: Trileaf Corporation Date: Dec 17, 2015 Project: COYOTE CANYON TCNS Number: 129798

FINDING OF NO CULTURAL PROPERTIES - The potential for cultural resources to be present within or near your proposed project is low and should not result in an adverse effect. However, if X cultural materials are discovered during construction please notify the Eastern Shoshone Tribal Historic Preservation Office.

After reviewing the materials you provided on the above referenced project, the Eastern Shoshone Tribal Historic Preservation Department finds that there may be a low potential for historic/cultural materials to be present during the proposed undertaking.

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has a long and storied history throughout a very large swath of the present day Unites States that we consider our aboriginal home lands. No further cultural resource work is necessary for this project as long as the areas outlined are adhered to. If additional work is necessary outside the areas designated, please notify our department to make the necessary arrangements.

If potential cultural resources are located during construction, please notify our office immediately. Thank you for consulting with the Eastern Shoshone Tribal Historic Preservation Office. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (307) 335-2081 or (307) 349-6406 or email me at [email protected] Thank you.

Wilfred Ferris, III Tribal Historic Preservation Officer

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141  314.997.6111 www.trileaf.com

November 23, 2015

Mescalero Apache Tribe Ms. Holly Houghten Historic Preservation Office P.O. Box 227 Mescalero, NM 88340

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 0.125 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Ms. Houghten:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Checklist at the above referenced property. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on, or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on, or within the viewshed of an Indian Religious Site. Our research to date has not indicated that any of these conditions exists. However, Trileaf has learned your tribe has an interest in property located within this County.

Our client proposes to construct a 195 not to exceed 199 foot self-support communications tower and associated equipment within a 75 foot by 75 foot (5,625 square foot) equipment lease area at the above property. The project includes a 20 foot wide proposed access/utility easement that extends generally south along Hunter Road connecting with US Highway 70. Currently the site habitat consists of an undeveloped land. The site location maps, construction drawings and photos are enclosed for your reference. The $125 review fee is in the mail. Please let us know if you have any objections or comments on this project as soon as possible.

Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

10845 Olive Boulevard, Suite 260, Saint Louis, Missouri 63141 - 314.997.6111 - www.trileaf.com

December 1, 2015

Mescalero Apache Tribe Ms. Holly Houghten Historic Preservation Office P.O. Box 227 Mescalero, NM 88340

RE: Crown Castle – COYOTE CANYON / BU #821945 – Trileaf Project #619424 North of 12 Hunter Road, Bent, NM 88314 Otero County, Mescalero Quadrangle (DeLorme) Latitude: 33° 10’ 59.263” N, Longitude: 105° 50’ 52.052” W UTM Zone: 13S 420965mE 3671908mN Survey Area: 5.409 acres TCNS# 129798; Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 13S, Range: 11E

Dear Ms. Houghten:

This project was originally submitted to your tribe via TCNS on July 31, 2015; TCNS #129798. The original Archaeological Survey report did not mention the access and utility easements that were surveyed by the archaeologist. The revised report includes the total area surveyed. The original survey area is noted as 0.125 acres, however the total area surveyed is 5.409 acres. The original and revised Archaeological Survey report are included.

Trileaf respectfully requests that you respond/comment on the proposed undertaking as soon as possible. Please call me at (314) 997-6111 or email [email protected] or [email protected] if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.

Sincerely,

Mindi Okai Tribal Consultation Manager

From: [email protected] To: tribal Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 129798) - Email ID #4434528 Date: Monday, December 14, 2015 6:22:30 PM

Dear Mindi Okai,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from Tribal Historic Preservation Officer Holly B Houghten of the Mescalero Apache Tribe in reference to Notification ID #129798:

After review of this communications project, it has been determined that the Mescalero Apache Tribe has no immediate concerns within the project area, and that the project will cause no adverse effects to cultural resources or areas of interest to the Mescalero Apache Tribe. If, however, the Applicant discovers archeological remains or resources during construction, the Applicant should stop construction and notify the appropriate Federal Agency and Tribe(s).

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/28/2015 Notification ID: 129798 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: Crown Castle Consultant Name: Mindi L Okai Street Address: 10845 Olive Blvd. Suite 260 City: St. Louis State: MISSOURI Zip Code: 63141 Phone: 314-997-6111 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 33 deg 10 min 59.3 sec N Longitude: 105 deg 50 min 52.1 sec W Location Description: North of 12 Hunter Road City: Bent State: NEW MEXICO County: OTERO

Detailed Description of Project: Legal Description: S14 T13S R11E Ground Elevation: 2238.5 meters Support Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 2299.2 meters above mean sea level Appendix G Resumes

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

MATTHEW J. KIVIKO PROJECT SCIENTIST

Education

B.S. Environmental Science, Emphasis in Ecology Minor in Business University of Arizona / Tucson, AZ

Areas of Expertise

Mr./Ms. NAME has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for commercial real estate and lending projects.

Mr. Kiviko has experience executing environmental due diligence projects throughout various regions of the United States, and specializing in the Southwest region.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Field Reconnaissance Phase II Environmental Site Assessments Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Historical City Directories Land Use History Environmental Evaluation Summaries Preliminary Risk Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps Local Government Consultation Flood Insurance Rate Maps Soil Characterization

Certifications/Affiliations

OSHA 40-Hour HAZWOPER

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

PATRICIA REES SENIOR PROJECT BIOLOGIST

Education

B.S. Environmental Science / Emphasis in Biology Minors in Chemistry and Anthropology Northern Arizona University / Flagstaff, AZ

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Rees has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM), as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects.

Ms. Rees also operates as the primary and secondary point-of-contact for multiple clients, and has experience executing and managing CEQA, NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects, specializing in work within the Western Region.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

FCC Regulatory Compliance Field Reconnaissance Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Review Informal Section 7 Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps FCC Memorandums of Agreement Flood Insurance Rate Maps Native American Monitoring Critical Habitat Maps Migratory Bird Evaluations Soil Characterization Section 106 Compliance Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Form 620/621 Submittals CERCLA Liability Archaeological and Architectural Impacts Historical City Directories Local Government Consultation Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Native American Consultation Land Use History

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Surveyor Certification – US Fish and Wildlife Service and AZ Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training ANSI/FCC RF Radiation Safety Competent Person American Heart Association First Aid, CPR, and AED certification

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

DENA WHITAKER SENIOR PROJECT BIOLOGIST

Education

B.A. Biological Sciences College of Charleston / Charleston, SC

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Whitaker has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for a variety of projects, as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects. Ms. Whitaker has experience executing NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects throughout various regions of the United States, and specializes in the Western Regions.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

Field Reconnaissance Section 106 Compliance Informal Section 7 Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments National Wetlands Inventory Maps Form 620/621 Submittals Flood Insurance Rate Maps Local Government Consultation Critical Habitat Maps Migratory Bird Evaluations Soil Characterization Native American Consultation Archaeological and Architectural Impacts FCC Memorandums of Agreement Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Land Use History Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Historical City Directories Environmental Evaluation Summaries

Additionally, Ms. Whitaker has worked in the Environmental Studies Department for College of Charleston helping researchers process biological data collected in the field.

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Survey Certification, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Arizona Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training Humpback Whale Field Intensive Program, Marine and Coastal Ecology Center, Texas A&M University

James J. Moses Owner/Sr. Archaeologist Antigua Archaeology, LLC

Curriculum Vita

Education and Degrees:

• Bachelor of Arts. Anthropology and Business, University of Arizona, Tucson. 1995

• United States Peace Corps. Intensive three-month language and cross cultural training. Republic of Panama. 1999

• AutoCAD. Pima Community College, Tucson, Arizona. 2002

Professional Permits:

• Arizona State Museum Blanket Permit (2013-043bl)- Principal Investigator • New Mexico State Survey and Inventory Permit (NM-13-218-S) and Monitoring Permit (NM-13-218-M) - Principal Investigator • Current (2013-2016)Bureau of Land Management (Arizona) Archaeological Permit No. AZ-000373- Principal Investigator

Professional Experience:

Antigua Archaeology, LLC Owner/Principal Investigator, Tucson, Arizona. Manage all phases of project including fieldwork, report preparation, client relations, report production including figures and writing, budgeting, and marketing. Has successively managed over 800 projects. 2005- present

Pima Community College Staff Archaeologist/Field Director, Center for Archaeological Field Training, Tucson, Arizona. Assist in teaching archaeology students how to conduct archaeological fieldwork including survey and data recovery, direct archaeological surveys, write reports, and assist in classroom teaching. Oversaw fieldwork and authored a report for a 3,300-acre survey north of Tucson. 2004-2005

Tierra Right of Way, Ltd. Field Supervisor, Tucson, Arizona. Field Supervisor on over fifty cultural resources assessment surveys and testing efforts in Arizona and New Mexico. 2002-2004

Archaeological Research Services Field Supervisor, Tucson, Arizona. Worked on a data recovery effort of a multi-component habitation site south of Safford, Graham County, Arizona. 2001-2002

1 United States Peace Corps Community Development Volunteer, Republic of Panama. Conceived and implemented several community-based projects including the construction of a community center, beach clean-ups, and a school garden. Also taught English to over fifty children and adults. 1999-2001

SWCA, Inc. Field Archaeologist, SWCA, Inc., Environmental Consultants, Tucson, Arizona. Field archaeologist on several testing and survey efforts. Involved in excavations at an Archaic Period habitation site excavation north of Safford, Arizona. Also excavated at Las Capas, an Early Agricultural site in the northern Tucson Basin. 1997-1999

Thunderbird Archaeology Field Supervisor, Woodstock, Virginia. Supervised archaeological surveys and testing efforts and worked as a field technician on several historic and prehistoric sites throughout the mid-Atlantic area. 1993-1997

Selected Publications:

A Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the 2400-Acre Agua Caliente Solar Project and the associated Q43 Substation, Yuma County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Approximately 500 Acres of the State Land-Portions of the AVSE and AVSE II Project Areas Located near Arlington, Maricopa County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM1 BHP Located Within the Navajo Nation at Navajo Road 4104, Fruitland, San Juan County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM4 HWY 599 Located at 7612 Baca lane in Santa Fe, Santa Fe County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM1 Abiquiu Located at Mile Marker 218.8 Highway 84, Abiquiu, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Collocation Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Roswell DT Located at 200 West First Street in Roswell, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Caveman Located at 1102 Pecos Highway in Malaga, Eddy County, New Mexico

Results of an Historic Properties Treatment Plan (Data Recovery Plan) for the Mitigation of Two Archaeological Sites (AZ N:7:218 and AZ N:7:379[ASM]) located within the Granite Dells Estates Phase 1A Commercial Area in Prescott, Yavapai County, Arizona.

2 Monitoring Results at Sites AZ CC:1:79, AZ CC:2:371, AZ CC:2:374, and AZ CC:2:375(ASM) and Associated Access Roads during Construction of the Hackberry-Thatcher 69-kV Electric Sub-Transmission Line Near Safford in Graham County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of 960 Acres located along Carefree Highway in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Class I and Class III (Intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Approximately 1,030 of the Ben Avery Shooting Facility located at 5000 West Carefree Highway (The Arizona Game & Fish Department Property) in Phoenix, Maricopa County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless LSC Tellbrook Located at 5990 Las Alturas Drive, Las Cruces, Dona Ana County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of 150 Acres Including a Proposed Haul Road Located West of U.S. Route 80 near Apache in Cochise County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of The Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility American Tower, LLC Witch Well AZAPO207C-A Located at Milepost 340.5 on Highway 191, St. Johns, Apache County, Arizona

A Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of a proposed 160-Acre Quarry Site and 10-Mile Access Road located Southeast of Florence, Pinal County, Arizona.

A Class I and Class III (intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Surveys of 308.2 Acres Located on Bureau of Land Management-administered Lands (The Arizona Strip) in Antelope Valley, Mohave County, Arizona

A Class I and Class III (intensive) Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Two Parcels (Quintilla and Smugg) Totaling 576 Acres Located on Bureau of Land Management- Administered Lands (The Arizona Strip), Mohave County, Arizona

Cultural Resources Survey of 3,300 Acres of the Willow Springs Ranch Property in Pinal County, Arizona. Project No. 04-01. Pima Community College Center for Archaeology Field Training. Tucson, Arizona.

3 Sarah K. Luchetta, M.A. Owner/Principal Investigator

Antigua Archaeology, LLC [email protected]

520-820-2035

Curriculum Vita

Education and Degrees:

 Masters of Arts Archaeology. University of Arizona, Tucson. 2005.  Bachelors of Arts (magna cum laude). Anthropology and Languages. University of Arizona, Tucson. 2002  Associates of Arts. Anthropology.  Basic Field Archaeology Certificate. Pima Community College, Tucson. 2002

Professional Permits and Qualifications:

 Arizona State Museum Blanket Permit  Bureau of Land Management (Arizona) Archaeological Permit  Prescott and Apache Sitgreaves National Forest Archaeological Permit  Secretary of Interior qualified

Professional Experience:

Mrs. Luchetta has worked as an archaeologist since 2000. Since that time she has participated in over 800 survey, testing, and data recovery efforts throughout the American southwest and has recorded dozens of historic and prehistoric sites and features. Sarah’s Master’s thesis researched the Twinn Hawks site, an upland riverine prehistoric habitation locale located along the San Pedro River in southern Arizona. Mrs. Luchetta founded Antigua Archaeology, LLC in August of 2005 with her husband James Moses. Since that time she has supervised over 800 Class III cultural resources assessment surveys throughout Arizona and New Mexico and has authored or co-authored as many reports. As co-owner and of Antigua Archaeology, LLC Mrs. Luchetta overseas fieldwork, editing, and report preparation. She is listed on an Arizona Bureau of Land Management permit and an Arizona State Museum blanket permit. Selected Publications:

2007 to Present:

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM01604-A (Santa Rosa North) Located at 1159 Joe and Louie Page Road, Santa Rosa, Guadalupe County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of Proposed Upgrades to the Existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM01031-P (AAV) PNM Persons Located at I-25 and Rio Bravo Boulevard SE in Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Cricket Communications ABQ-077 (Enchanted Hills) Located at Chopin Road NE and Offenbach Road NE in Rio Rancho, Sandoval County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility AT&T 1854_SR (BSA Philmont) Located at 17 Deer Run Road in Cimarron, Colfax County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Mayhill Located South of Highway 82 Near the Town of Hope, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04044-B (Roadrunner Ranch) Located Northwest of Ramon, Lincoln County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM03007-A (Pink Schoolhouse) Located at 38393 Highway 285 in Tres Piedras, Taos County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04070-A (Felix River Ranch) Located at 74 No Where Road in Hope, Chavez County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of a Proposed Collocation to the Existing Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04060-A (Insite Cloudcroft) Located at 240 Mescalero Avenue in Cloudcroft, Otero County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility T-Mobile USA NM04081-B (Double V Ranch) Located Near the Intersection of State Route 20 and County Road 1-8 Southwest of Fort Sumner, De Baca County, New Mexico

A Class I and Class III Cultural Resources Assessment Survey of the Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Facility Verizon Wireless NM6 Spokan Located at the Northeast Corner of Highway 285 and Pueblo Road in Lake Arthur, Chavez County, New Mexico

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

MICHELLE D. OGBURN, C.E.M. PROJECT MANAGER

Education

B.S. of Environmental Science with an Emphasis in Hydrology, Soil Science, and Chemistry University of Arizona / Tucson, AZ

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Michelle D. Ogburn has 11 years of experience with the investigation and management of environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM), as well as National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and environmental permitting projects. Ms. Ogburn operates as the primary point-of-contact for clients over a large geography, specializing within the Western Region of the United States.

Environmental service expertise includes:

Environmental Site Assessments Native American Consultation Soil and Groundwater Management Plans FCC Memorandums of Agreement Environmental Evaluation Summaries NEPA Environmental Assessments Indoor Air Quality Assessments Critical Habitat and Species Review Asbestos Inspections Migratory Bird Evaluations DAS In-Building Limited Site Inspections Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Review CERCLA Liability FCC Regulatory Compliance Mold and Lead-Based Paint Surveys Archaeological and Architectural Impacts Groundwater Well Installation and Monitoring Soil and Groundwater Remediation Vendor Management Underground Storage Tank Assessment/Removal Site Characterization Construction Environmental Oversight Small Cell Solutions Soil Characterization

Additionally, Ms. Ogburn has significant experience interacting with Native American tribes throughout the Western Region of the United States and is Trileaf’s Western Region Health and Safety Manager.

Certifications/Affiliations

OSHA 40-Hour HAZWOPER ANSI/FCC RF Radiation Safety Competent Person Environmental Professional (EP) as defined by ASTM Standard E1527-13 (AAI) Certified Environmental Manager – NV (License #2416) Burrowing Owl Surveyor Certification – US Fish and Wildlife Service and AZ Fish and Game Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training Environmental Professionals of Arizona (EPAZ)

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

ELIZABETH SHULE PROJECT MANAGER II

Education

B.A. Environmental Studies Minors in Economics and Anthropology/Sociology Knox College / Galesburg, IL

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Shule has experience with the investigation and management of environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM), as well as National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and environmental permitting projects. Ms. Shule operates as the primary point-of-contact for clients over a large geography, specializing within the Western Region of the United States.

Environmental service expertise includes:

Environmental Site Assessments Small Cell Solutions Transaction Screen Assessments NEPA Environmental Assessments Soil and Groundwater Management Plans Critical Habitat and Species Review Environmental Evaluation Summaries Migratory Bird Evaluations CERCLA Liability Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Review FCC Regulatory Compliance Native American Consultation

Certifications/Affiliations

ANSI/FCC RF Radiation Safety Competent Person

PROFESSIONAL RESUME

MEAGHAN AUSTIN PROJECT MANAGER

Education

B.S. Environmental Science / Emphasis in Biology Northern Arizona University / Flagstaff, AZ

Areas of Expertise

Ms. Austin has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for a variety of projects, as well as performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews, and National Programmatic Agreement (NPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects.

Ms. Austin operates as the primary point-of-contact for multiple clients regarding migratory bird evaluations and as a secondary point-of-contact for NEPA, environmental due diligence, and permitting projects over a large geography, specializing within the Western Region of the United States.

Environmental service expertise includes the preparation and/or review of:

Migratory Bird Evaluations and Review Archaeological and Architectural Impacts FCC Regulatory Compliance Section 106 Compliance Nationwide Programmatic Agreement Review Form 620/621 Submittals Critical Habitat and Species Review Native American Consultation NEPA Environmental Assessments Local Government Consultation Environmental Site and Habitat Assessments Phase I Environmental Site Assessments Environmental Evaluation Summaries CERCLA Liability Informal Section 7 Consultation Land Use History Flood Insurance Rate Maps Historical City Directories National Wetlands Inventory Maps Field Reconnaissance Soil Characterization Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery

Additionally, Ms. Austin has modeled climatic variation and its effect on clutch phenology, species distribution patters and desert tortoise survival; this research is published within eight peer-reviewed scientific journals.

Certifications/Affiliations

Burrowing Owl Surveyor Certification – US Fish and Wildlife Service and AZ Game and Fish Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Cultural Sensitivity Training ANSI/FCC RF Radiation Safety Competent Person American Heart Association First Aid, CPR, and AED certification

Appendix H BLM General Guide Stipulations BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LAS CRUCES DISTRICT OFFICE

GENERAL PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES/GUIDE STIPULATIONS FOR RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND OTHER LAND USE AUTHORIZATIONS

These stipulations have been reviewed and approved by the Las Cruces District Manager, through interdisciplinary resource specialist review and should not be modified. Special stipulations may be developed for site-specific issues.

1. REALTY ...... 1-1 2. AIR ...... 1-5 3. CULTURAL ...... 1-5 4. WASTE/HAZMAT ...... 1-6 5. LIVESTOCK ...... 1-7 6. MINERALS ...... 1-7 7. PALEONTOLOGY ...... 1-7 8. SAFETY ...... 1-8 9. SOILS ...... 1-8 10. VEGETATION ...... 1-9 11. VISUAL ...... 1-11 12. WATER ...... 1-11 13. WEEDS ...... 1-12 14. WILDLIFE ...... 1-12 15. SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS ...... 1-13

1. REALTY

a) The Holder shall construct, operate, and maintain the facilities, improvements, and structures within the authorized area in strict conformity with the guide stipulations, plan of development and the terms and conditions of the authorization. Any relocation, additional construction, or use that is not in accord with the guide stipulations, shall not be initiated without the prior written approval of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Authorized Officer. A copy of the complete authorization, including all stipulations, shall be made available on the authorized area during construction, operation, and termination to the Authorized Officer. Noncompliance with the above will be grounds for immediate temporary suspension of activities if the noncompliance constitutes a threat to public health and safety or the environment.

b) All design, material, and construction, operation, maintenance, and termination practices shall be in accordance with safe and proven applicable engineering practices, codes, specifications, and standards.

July 2017 1-1

c) The Holder shall submit a plan of development that describes in detail the construction, operation, maintenance, and termination of the authorized area and its associated improvements and/or facilities. The plan shall include drawings in sufficient detail to enable a complete evaluation of all proposed structures, facilities, and landscaping to ensure compliance with the requirements of the grant and to ensure visual compatibility with the site. These drawings shall be the construction documents and must show dimensions, materials, finishes, etc., to demonstrate compliance with all requirements. The plan will be reviewed and, if appropriate, modified and approved by the Authorized Officer, to ensure conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) document prepared for the project. Such design features and/or mitigations measures are necessary to protect cultural and natural resources. An approved plan of development shall be made a part of the authorization.

d) The Holder shall designate a representative(s) who has the authority to act upon and implement instructions from the Authorized Officer. The Holder's representative shall be available for communication with the Authorized Officer within a reasonable time when construction or other surface disturbing activities are underway.

e) The Holder shall contact the Authorized Officer at least 2 weeks prior to the anticipated start of construction or any surface disturbing activities. A preconstruction (pre-work) conference with the Holder prior to the Holder's commencing work and/or surface disturbing activities on the authorized area is required. The Holder and/or his representative shall attend this conference. The Holder's contractor, or agents involved with construction and/or any surface disturbing activities associated with the authorization, shall also attend this conference to review the stipulations of the grant including the plan(s) of development.

f) The Holder shall not initiate any construction or other surface disturbing activities on the authorized area without the prior written approval of the Authorized Officer. Such approval shall be a written notice to proceed issued by the Authorized Officer. Any notice to proceed shall authorize construction or use only as therein expressly stated and only for the particular location or use therein described.

g) The Authorized Officer may suspend or terminate in whole, or in part, any notice to proceed which has been issued when, in his or her judgment, unforeseen conditions arise which result in the approved terms and conditions being inadequate to protect public health and safety or to protect the environment.

h) The Holder shall mark work limits and control points along with work layout marking. Work layout marking shall include the centerline and/or the exterior boundaries of the authorized area with a stake and/or at industry standard intervals. The intervals may be varied at the time of staking at the discretion of the Authorized Officer. The tops of the stakes and/or laths will be painted and the laths flagged in a distinctive color as determined by the Holder. The survey station numbers will be marked on the boundary

July 2017 1-2

stakes and/or laths at the entrance to and the exit from public land. The Holder shall maintain all boundary stakes and/or laths in place until final cleanup and restoration is completed and approved by the Authorized Officer. The stakes and/or laths will then be removed at the direction of the Authorized Officer.

i) The Holder shall place slope stakes, culvert location and grade stakes, and other construction control stakes as deemed necessary by the Authorized Officer to ensure construction in accordance with the plan of development. If stakes are disturbed or removed, they shall be reset before proceeding with construction.

j) Specific sites as previously identified by the Authorized Officer (e.g. archeological sites, areas with threatened and endangered species, or fragile watersheds) where construction equipment and vehicles shall not be allowed shall be clearly marked onsite by the Holder before construction or surface disturbing activities begin. The Holder shall be responsible for ensuring that construction personnel are well-trained to recognize these markers and understand the equipment movement restrictions involved.

k) The Holder shall conduct all construction, operation, maintenance, and termination activities within the authorized area.

l) The Holder shall post as directed by the Authorized Officer, the BLM serial number assigned to this authorization.

m) The Holder shall protect all survey monuments found within the authorized area. Survey monuments include, but are not limited to, General Land Office and BLM Cadastral Survey Corners, reference corners, witness points, U.S. Coastal and Geodetic benchmarks and triangulation stations, military control monuments, and recognizable civil (both public and private) survey monuments. In the event of obliteration or disturbance of any of the above, the Holder shall immediately report the incident, in writing, to the Authorized Officer and the respective installing authority if known. Where General Land Office or BLM monuments or references are obliterated during operations, the Holder shall secure the services of a registered land surveyor or a BLM cadastral surveyor to restore the disturbed monuments and references using surveying procedures found in the Manual of Surveying Instructions for the Survey of the Public Lands in the United States, latest edition. The Holder shall record such survey in the appropriate county and send a copy to the Authorized Officer. If the BLM cadastral surveyors or other Federal surveyors are used to restore the disturbed survey monument, the Holder shall be responsible for the survey cost.

n) Prior to any ground disturbing activity, the Holder will obtain any required Federal, state, or local government, and private landowner express written permission(s). This includes but is not limited to authorizations, permits, easements, and licenses. The Holder must provide copies of these permissions to the BLM prior to final issuance of the land use authorization.

July 2017 1-3

o) Construction and/or maintenance related traffic shall be restricted to routes approved by the Authorized Officer. New roads or cross-country vehicle travel will not be permitted unless prior written approval is given by the Authorized Officer. Authorized roads used by the Holder shall be rehabilitated or maintained as directed by the Authorized Officer.

p) Except authorizations expressly for a road, after construction of the facility is completed, the Holder shall not use the authorized area as a road for purposes other than routine maintenance as determined necessary by the Authorized Officer in consultation with the Holder.

q) The Holder shall permit free and unrestricted public access to and upon the authorized area for all lawful purposes except for those specific areas designated as restricted by the Authorized Officer to protect the public, wildlife, livestock, or facilities constructed within the authorized area.

r) In the event that the public land underlying the authorized area encompassed in this authorization, or a portion thereof, is conveyed out of Federal ownership and administration of the authorization or the land underlying the authorized area is not being reserved to the United States in the patent/deed and/or the authorized area is not within a corridor being reserved to the United States in the patent/deed, the United States waives any right it has to administer the authorization, or portion thereof, within the conveyed land under Federal laws, statutes, and regulations, including the regulations at 43 CFR Part [2800][2880], including any rights to have the Holder apply to the BLM for amendments, modifications, or assignments and for the BLM to approve or recognize such amendments, modifications, or assignments. At the time of conveyance, the patentee/grantee, and their successors and assigns, shall succeed to the interests of the United States in all matters relating to the authorization, or portion thereof, within the conveyed land and shall be subject to applicable state and local government laws, statutes, and ordinances. After conveyance, any disputes concerning compliance with the use and the terms and conditions of the authorization shall be considered a civil matter between the patentee/grantee and the authorization Holder.

s) The Holder of this authorization or the Holder's successor in interest shall comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d, et seq.) and the regulations of the Secretary of the Interior issued pursuant thereto.

t) The Holder will reclaim disturbed areas in accordance with these stipulations, which establish guidelines to be used during reclamation, when necessary on lands administered by the BLM.

u) Prior to termination of the authorization, the Holder shall contact the Authorized Officer to arrange a joint inspection of the authorized area. This inspection will be held to agree to an acceptable termination (and rehabilitation) plan. This plan shall include, but is not limited to, removal of facilities, drainage structures, or surface material, re-contouring, top-soiling, or seeding. The Authorized Officer must approve the plan in writing prior to the Holder’s commencement of any termination activities.

July 2017 1-4

v) The United States, its officers and employees shall be held harmless from and indemnified against any damage, injury, or liability resulting from the operation, maintenance, or termination of this authorization; including but not limited to any liability which the United States may have as owner of the land which is the subject of the authorization.

w) The Holder shall within 30 days following completion of the facility, submit proof of construction. Said proof shall include "as built" drawings of site construction, location of building, tower, roads, utility lines, and an "as built" drawing of the building showing all changes from the approved design. Final approval and occupancy will not be allowed until these drawings are approved by the Authorized Officer. At the discretion of the Authorized Officer, “as built” drawings may be required to be certified by a Professional Engineer, registered in the State of New Mexico, that the facilities have been constructed in conformance with approved designs.

x) The Holder shall inform the BLM of any changes to their authorization; all information required in the SF-299 application and 2920-1 permit must be updated throughout the term of the authorization. Changes include actions, but are not limited to: change in use, name change, assignment, address change, ownership, and any data entry required in the SF-299, including supplemental documents.

y) If the authorization is renewable, a new application must be received (BLM date- stamped) within 120 days before the authorization expiration date in order to retain the existing authorization serial case number. If the authorization is renewable and an application is received after the 120-day requirement as noted above, the authorization will be adjudicated under a new serial case number.

2. AIR

a) The Holder shall meet all Federal, State of New Mexico, and local emission standards for air quality.

b) The Holder shall meet all Federal, State of New Mexico, and local standards for necessary dust control measures as approved by the Authorized Officer.

c) The Holder shall implement dust abatement measures as needed to prevent fugitive dust from vehicular traffic, equipment operations, or wind events. The BLM may direct the operator to change the level and type of treatment (watering or application of various dust agents, surfactants, and road surfacing material) if dust abatement measures are observed to be insufficient to prevent fugitive dust.

3. CULTURAL

Any cultural resource (historic or prehistoric site or object) discovered by the Holder, or any person working on his or her behalf, on public or Federal land shall be immediately reported to the Authorized Officer. The Holder shall suspend all operations within 100 feet of such

July 2017 1-5

discovery until written authorization to proceed is issued by the Authorized Officer. In addition, the area of discovery will be covered, stabilized, or otherwise protected from damage. An evaluation of the discovery will be made by the Authorized Officer to determine appropriate actions to prevent the loss of significant cultural or scientific values. The Holder will be responsible for the cost of evaluation and any decision as to proper mitigation measures will be made by the Authorized Officer after consulting with the Holder.

4. WASTE/HAZMAT

a) The authorized area shall be maintained in a sanitary condition at all times; waste materials at those sites shall be disposed of promptly at an appropriate waste disposal site. “Waste” means all discarded matter including, but not limited to, human waste, trash, garbage, refuse, oil drums, petroleum products, ashes, and equipment.

b) All waste disposal sites on public land must be approved in writing by the Authorized Officer in advance of use.

c) The Holder shall immediately clean, isolate in appropriate containers and dispose of at approved waste receiving facilities any soil, water or materials contaminated by fuels, lubricants, hydraulic fluids, engine fluids or other hazardous and potentially hazardous materials or petroleum products.

d) The Holder(s) shall comply with all applicable Federal laws and regulations existing or hereafter enacted or promulgated. In any event, the Holder(s) shall comply with the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, as amended (15 U.S.C. 2601, et seq.) with regard to any toxic substances that are used, generated by or stored on the authorized area or on facilities authorized under this authorization. (See 40 CFR, Part 702-799 and especially, provisions on polychlorinated biphenyls, 40 CFR 761.1-761.193.) Additionally, any release of toxic substances (leaks, spills, etc.) in excess of the reportable quantity established by 40 CFR, Part 117 shall be reported as required by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, Section 102b. A copy of any report required or requested by any Federal agency or State government as a result of a reportable release or spill of any toxic substances shall be furnished to the Authorized Officer concurrent with the filing of the reports to the involved Federal agency or State government.

e) The Holder agrees to indemnify the United States against any liability arising from the release of any hazardous substance or hazardous waste (as these terms are defined in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq. or the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. 6901, et seq.) on the authorized area unless the release or threatened release is wholly unrelated to the authorization Holder's activity on the authorized area. This agreement applies without regard to whether a release is caused by the Holder, its agent, or unrelated third parties.

July 2017 1-6

f) The Holder shall properly report the occurrence of any spills associated with project construction and operation, and shall report and respond to spills of potential contaminants, such as gasoline, diesel, motor oils, solvents, chemicals, toxic and corrosive substances, etc., which may be a threat to public health or the environment. A Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan, as required for compliance with the Act, shall ensure minimal impact of on-site petroleum storage.

5. LIVESTOCK

a) The Holder shall minimize disturbance to existing fences and other improvements on public land. The Holder is required to promptly repair impacted improvements to at least their former state. The Holder shall contact the owner of any improvements prior to disturbing them. When necessary to pass through a fence line, the fence shall be braced on both sides of the passageway prior to cutting of the fence. No permanent gates shall be allowed unless approved by the Authorized Officer. If livestock are present in the area, ensure no cattle pass while gate is constructed.

b) Fences, gates, and brace panels shall be constructed to appropriate BLM standards and/or specifications as determined by the Authorized Officer.

c) When construction activity in connection with the authorization breaks or destroys a natural barrier used for livestock control, the gap, thus opened, shall be fenced to prevent the drift of livestock. The subject natural barrier shall be identified by the Authorized Officer and fenced by the Holder as per instruction of the Authorized Officer.

6. MINERALS

a) Use of native minerals materials is allowed within the authorized area on land administered by the BLM. Mineral materials shall not be removed from the authorized area without the Holder obtaining the appropriate mineral materials permit.

b) All off-site borrow areas must be approved in writing by the Authorized Officer in advance of excavation.

c) Excess excavated, unsuitable, or slide materials shall be disposed of as directed by the Authorized Officer. Appropriate mineral materials authorization shall be obtained prior to disposal.

7. PALEONTOLOGY

The Holder shall immediately notify the BLM Authorized Officer of any paleontological resources discovered as a result of operation under this authorization. The Holder shall suspend all activities in the vicinity of such discovery until notified to proceed by the Authorized Officer and shall protect the discovery from damage or looting. The Holder may not be required to suspend all operations if activities can be adjusted to avoid further impacts to a discovered locality or be continued elsewhere. The Authorized Officer will evaluate, or

July 2017 1-7

will have evaluated, such discoveries as soon as possible, but not later than 10 working days after being notified. Appropriate measures to mitigate adverse effects to significant paleontological resources will be determined by the Authorized Officer after consulting with the Holder. Within 10 days, the Holder will be allowed to continue construction through the site, or will be given the choice of either (1) following the Authorized Officer’s instructions for stabilizing the fossil resource in place and avoiding further disturbance to the fossil resource, or (2) following the Authorized Officer’s instructions for mitigating impacts to the fossil resource prior to continuing construction through the project area.

8. SAFETY

a) Construction excavations, holes and trenches in roadways or in areas where pedestrians or vehicular traffic is present will be flagged, plated, or appropriately marked as required.

b) The Holder shall provide for the safety of the public entering the authorized area. This includes, but is not limited to, barricades for open trenches, flagmen/flagwomen with communication systems for single-lane roads without visible turnouts, and attached gates for blasting operations.

c) The Holder shall maintain the authorized area in a safe, usable condition, as directed by the Authorized Officer.

d) During conditions of extreme fire danger, operations shall be limited or suspended in specific areas, or additional measures may be required by the Authorized Officer.

9. SOILS

a) Erosion issues shall be repaired as discovered, as directed by the Authorized Officer.

b) No activities shall be performed during periods when the soil is too wet to adequately support construction equipment. If such equipment creates ruts in excess of 3 inches deep, the soil shall be deemed too wet to support construction equipment.

c) The Holder shall be responsible for the prevention and control of soil erosion, storm water runoff, stabilization, and re-vegetation on BLM-administered land covered by this authorization, and land adjacent thereto, where such erosion has resulted from construction or maintenance of this project.

d) If diversion of water from the authorized area will result in accelerated erosion in undisturbed areas, water bars shall not be constructed. Furthermore, if the authorized area has a side slope approximately one-third or more of the slope along the length of the authorized area, water bars may not be constructed. Exceptions to spacing intervals will be upon approval of the Authorized Officer.

July 2017 1-8

e) The Holder shall re-contour disturbed areas, or designated sections of the authorized area by grading to restore the sites to approximately the original contour of the ground, as determined by the Authorized Officer.

f) The Holder shall, as directed by the Authorized Officer, rectify backfill settling in the authorized area.

g) When sufficiently abundant, overburden and topsoil will be stockpiled (within the authorized area) during construction for use during reclamation. Prior to seeding, the topsoil will be re-deposited (shaped and contoured) to resemble surrounding topography. Ripping or plowing compacted soils may be necessary in some areas and will be addressed on a case-by-case basis, as directed by the Authorized Officer.

h) The Holder shall uniformly spread topsoil over all unoccupied disturbed areas (outside the ditch line, fence line, or work area). Spreading shall not be done while the ground or topsoil is frozen or wet.

i) The Holder shall restore drainages, to the greatest extent possible, to the original bank concentration, stream-bottom width and channel gradient.

j) The Holder shall construct, maintain, repair, or replace, erosion control measures (water bars, etc.), barriers, and sedimentation control devices as necessary to ensure optimum function, as directed by the Authorized Officer.

10. VEGETATION

a) The Holder shall remove only the minimum amount of vegetation necessary for the construction of structures and facilities. Topsoil shall be conserved during excavation and reused as cover on disturbed areas to facilitate regrowth of vegetation.

b) The Holder shall, as determined and directed by the Authorized Officer, seed all disturbed areas, using an agreed upon method suitable for the location. Seeding shall be repeated if a satisfactory stand is not obtained as determined by the Authorized Officer upon evaluation.

i. Seed-bed preparation shall be performed to provide a hospitable environment for germinating seed by breaking up impermeable soil layers that have formed and increasing void spaces for air and water. Ground shall be roughed-up prior to seeding, by raking, harrowing or other methods, especially those areas that are compacted during project construction.

ii. Seeding shall be accomplished in June or July to coincide with the "rainy" season to achieve optimum results. Seed will be planted a quarter to half inch deep using a disc type or similar rangeland drill sufficient to accommodate variations in seed sizes, or if broadcast, the rates should be doubled. If broadcasted, seed shall be broadcast with a "cyclone" hand seeder or similar broadcast seeder to facilitate an

July 2017 1-9

even spread. After seed is broadcast, ground shall be raked or dragged, to help bury it and improve soil contact and provide texture.

iii. Mulching is required on all seeding projects to prevent loss of moisture and seed to wind. Mulch shall be free of weeds and weed seed. Rotten or molded hay is not acceptable as mulch. Mulching shall be accomplished using one of these following methods:

• Weed free straw (2 tons/ac.; kg/ha) • Wood residues (sawdust, wood chips, bark (2 tons/ac.; kg/ha) • Hydro-mulching (1,500 lbs./ac.; kg/ha) • Composted manure (5 tons/ac.; kg/ha) • Excelsior blanket • Straw jute

iv. Straw mulch is not recommended if livestock potentially have access to the area. Livestock should be temporarily fenced-out of any seeded area (as determined necessary by the Authorized Officer). Livestock use will reduce possibility of successful re-vegetation. Probability of successful seeding will be increased if fencing remains until reclamation is stable and plants have grown well enough to withstand grazing. Any or all fencing requirement will be determined by the Authorized Officer.

v. Mulch shall be applied on the surface within 1 day following seeding. A soil- stabilant shall be applied as an overspray after seed and mulch are in place. This tack should be at a sufficient rate so as to prevent mulch from moving due to wind. The following site identifies certified weed-free mulch providers: http://aces.nmsu.edu/ces/seedcert/certified-weed-free-fora.html. Site-specific seed mix will be reviewed and approved by the Authorized Officer.

vi. Any seed used on public land shall not contain noxious weed seed and must meet certified seed quality. The seed procured for use on public land will meet the Federal Seed Act criteria. All seed to be applied on public land must have a valid seed test, within 1 year of the acceptance date, from a seed analysis lab by a registered seed analyst (Association of Official Seed Analysts). The seed lab results shall show no more than 0.5 percent by weight of other weed seeds. The seed lot shall contain no noxious, prohibited, or restricted weed seeds according to state seed laws in the respective state(s). Copies of the seed lab test results, including purity and germination (viability) rate, must be forwarded to the appropriate BLM office prior to seed application. If the seed does not meet the BLM and State/Federal standards for noxious weed seed content or other crop seed allowances, it shall not be applied to public land.

vii. Stabilization will occur after a minimum of two full summer growing seasons after planting.

July 2017 1-10

11. VISUAL

a) All above-ground structures not subject to safety requirements shall be color treated by the Holder to blend in with the natural color of the landscape, as directed by the Authorized Officer. The color treatment used shall be a color which simulates Standard Environmental Colors designated by the Rocky Mountain Five-State Interagency Committee.

b) No signs or advertising devices shall be placed on the premises or on adjacent public land except those posted by or at the direction of the Authorized Officer.

12. WATER

a) The Holder is prohibited from discharging oil or other pollutants into or upon the navigable waters of the United States, adjoining shorelines, or the waters of the contiguous zone in violation of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1321, and the regulations issued thereunder, or applicable laws of the State(s) of [user entry] and regulations issued thereunder. The Holder shall give immediate notice of any such discharge to the Authorized Officer and such other Federal and State officials as are required by law to be given such notice.

b) The Holder shall comply with the construction practices and mitigating measures established by 33 CFR 323.4, which sets forth the parameters of the "nationwide permit" required by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. If the proposed action exceeds the parameters of the nationwide permit, the Holder shall obtain an individual permit from the appropriate office of the Army Corps of Engineers and provide the Authorized Officer with a copy of the same. Failure to comply with this requirement shall be cause for suspension or termination of this authorization.

c) The Holder shall construct water diversions on all disturbed areas to the spacing and cross sections specified by the Authorized Officer. Water diversions are to be constructed to: (1) simulate the imaginary contour lines of the slope (ideally with a grade of 1 or 2 percent); (2) drain away from the disturbed area; and (3) begin and end in vegetation or rock whenever possible. Water diversions typically will consist of water bars constructed at the following spacing intervals:

PERCENT SLOPE SPACING INTERVAL Less than 1% 400 feet 1-5% 300 feet 5-15% 200 feet 15-25% 100 feet More than 25% 50 feet

July 2017 1-11

13. WEEDS

a) The Holder shall be responsible for weed control on disturbed areas within the limits of the site. The Holder is responsible for consultation with the Authorized Officer and/or local authorities for acceptable weed control methods, which include following the Environmental Protection Act and BLM requirements and policy.

b) Power or high-pressure clean all equipment of all mud, dirt, and plants immediately prior to moving into the project area. Any gravel or fill to be used must come from weed-free sources. Inspect gravel pits and fill sources to identify weed-free sources. No soil spoil that could potentially contain noxious weed seeds shall be transported out of the area where it is created.

c) The Holder shall be responsible for conducting a survey for and control of noxious weeds along the route proposed for construction. If during construction, noxious weeds are identified that were not originally encountered during the survey, the project applicant shall avoid driving vehicles and equipment through or over the infested area. If avoidance measures cannot be taken within the area originally cleared, construction shall cease and the Authorized Officer shall be contacted.

d) Any use of herbicides/pesticides shall comply with the applicable Federal and State laws. Herbicides/pesticides shall be used only in accordance with their registered uses and within limitations imposed by the Secretary of the Interior. Prior to the use of pesticides, the Holder shall obtain from the Authorized Officer written approval of a plan showing the type and quantity of materials to be used, pest(s) to be controlled, method of application, location of storage and disposal of containers, and any other information deemed necessary by the Authorized Officer. Emergency use of pesticides shall be approved in writing by the Authorized Officer prior to use.

14. WILDLIFE

a) Construction holes left open overnight shall be covered. Covers shall be secured in place and shall be strong enough to prevent livestock or wildlife from falling through and into a hole.

b) Screen caps or covers shall be install on any open-top vertical pipes less than 12 inches in diameter, to reduce wildlife mortality resulting from entrapment.

c) If the Holder's construction or maintenance activities occur during the migratory bird nesting season (March 1 through September 15), the project area will be inspected for nests by a qualified biologist. Established stick nests will always be identified and avoided; stick nest locations shall be provided to the Authorized Officer.

d) If during construction wildlife species (such as reptiles, amphibians, or small mammals) are encountered, they would be avoided or allowed to move out of the way.

July 2017 1-12 15. SPECIAL STATUS PLANTS

For construction and maintenance activities on authorizations that are in and adjacent to occupied habitat for special status plants (endangered, threatened, BLM sensitive), the project area will be inspected by a qualified botanist prior to beginning work. Special status plants will be identified and avoided, or the Authorized Officer will be contacted if this is not possible. Special status plant observations will be provided to the Authorized Officer.

16. SPECIAL POWERLINE STIPULATION

Unless otherwise agreed to by the authorized officer in writing, power lines shall be constructed in accordance to standards outlined in the Avian Protection Plan Guidelines, as promulgated by the Edison Electric Institute’s Avian Power Line Interaction Committee (APLIC), and the most recent edition of, "Suggested Practices for Raptor Protection on Power lines," Raptor Research Foundation, Inc. The Holder shall assume the burden and expense of proving that pole designs not shown in the above publication are "eagle safe." Such proof shall be provided by a raptor expert approved by the authorized officer. The BLM reserves the right to require modifications or additions to all power line structures placed on this ROW, should they be necessary to ensure the safety of large perching birds. Such modifications and/or additions shall be made by the holder without liability or expense to the United States.

July 2017 1-13