[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 58 (Tuesday, March 26, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13796-13799]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-7248]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


General Management Plan Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact 
Statement Death Valley National Park, California/Nevada; Notice of 
Approved Record of Decision

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior, National Park Service, has 
prepared a Record of Decision on the Final General Management Plan and 
Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact Statement for Death Valley 
National Park. The Record of Decision includes background on the 
conservation planning effort, a description of the decision made and 
synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for the decision, 
findings on impairment of park resources and values, a description of 
the environmentally preferable alternative, a discussion of measures to 
minimize environmental harm, and an overview of public and agency 
involvement in the decision-making process. The new General Management 
Plan will be used by park staff as a ``blueprint'' for managing the 
park over the next 10-15 years.
    Decision (Selected Action): As detailed in the Record of Decision, 
the National Park Service (NPS) will implement Alternative 1, the 
proposed action, described in the Revised Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement and General Management Plan and the Abbreviated Final 
Environmental Impact Statement and General Management Plan. As a public 
service subsequent to the approval of the Record of Decision, the NPS 
will excerpt and reprint the final General Management Plan (the 
selected alternative) as a stand-alone Presentation Plan document. The 
selected alternative was both the agency-preferred alternative and the 
environmentally preferred alternative.
    The selected plan represents the best mix of actions, policies, and 
strategies for the management of Death Valley National Park, given 
diverse public opinion and varying mandates. The General Management 
Plan (GMP) envisions the park as a natural environment and a cultural 
landscape (an arid ecosystem overlain by many layers of human 
occupation and use from prehistoric to historic to the present time), 
where the protection of native desert ecosystems and processes is 
assured for future generations. The protection and perpetuation of 
native species in a self-sustaining environment is a primary long-term 
goal. The GMP seeks to manage the park to perpetuate the sense of 
discovery and adventure that currently exists. This means limiting new 
development inside the park. The GMP envisions adjacent ``gateway'' 
communities as providing increased support services (food, gas, and 
lodging) for visitors, but also seeks to retain current opportunities 
for roadside camping, backcountry camping, and access to the 
backcountry via existing primitive roads, consistent with the NPS 
mission. The current park management strategies and policies will apply 
to the new park lands and put in place the necessary planning and 
management components to adequately address the Wilderness designation 
of 95% of the park lands. The GMP also fulfills the NPS mission of 
resource preservation and provision of visitor services while achieving 
other mandates from Congress. A stated goal of the GMP is to seek 
funding to purchase private property within the park from willing 
sellers.
    Other Alternatives Considered: In addition to the proposal, other 
alternatives considered included ``existing management'' and an 
``optional management'' approach. The existing management alternative 
(Alternative 2) describes the continuation of current management 
strategies. It is commonly referred to as the no-action or status quo 
alternative. It provides a baseline from which to compare other 
alternatives, to evaluate the magnitude of proposed changes, and to 
assess the potential environmental

[[Page 13797]]

effects of those changes. This ``no new actions'' concept follows the 
guidance of the Council on Environmental Quality, which describes the 
No Action Alternative as no change from the existing management 
direction or level of management intensity. It does not mean that no 
agency management actions would be taken. Death Valley National Park 
would continue managing the park according to policies and strategies 
identified in the 1989 GMP.
    The optional approach (Alternative 3) is similar to the proposed 
action, except this alternative identifies the closing and restoration 
to a natural condition of the Chicken Strip airstrip at Saline Valley 
(adversely affecting those people who visit the area by airplane). This 
alternative also proposes closing the historic Emigrant campground 
because of potential flood hazards. All areas within the Eureka-Saline 
wilderness road corridor would be open for roadside camping. Designated 
car camping sites would be established in the area of the Saline Valley 
warm springs. Additional distinctions were detailed in the approved 
Record of Decision.
    Basis for Decision: The selected GMP provides a logical, systematic 
and proactive approach to management of the Park in compliance with NPS 
laws, regulations and policies. The further rationale for selecting 
Alternative 1 over the no-action Alternative is based on the lessened 
environmental impacts that would be anticipated to occur by seeking 
funds and implementing activities identified in the proposed plan. 
Public opinion also helped inform the NPS's preferred approach over 
Alternative 3. In particular, preserving the natural quiet and sounds 
associated with the physical and biological resources of the park, 
management of Wilderness for maximum protection, funding of the full 
removal of feral burros, enhanced interpretive information to educate 
the public on desert ecosystems, geological processes, and the 
prehistoric, historical and Native American record, and improved 
administrative operations are among the key elements of the new GMP.
    No Impairment of Park Resources and Values: The NPS may not allow 
the impairment of park resources and values unless directly and 
specifically provided for by legislation or by the proclamation 
establishing the park. Impairment that is prohibited by the NPS's 
Organic Act and the General Authorities Act is an impact that, in the 
professional judgment of the responsible manager, would harm the 
integrity of park resources or values, including the opportunities that 
otherwise would be present for the enjoyment of those resources or 
values. In determining whether impairment may ensue from an action, 
park managers consider duration, severity, and magnitude of the impact; 
resources and values affected; and direct, indirect, and cumulative 
effects of the action. According to NPS Policy, ``An impact would be 
more likely to constitute an impairment to the extent that it affects a 
resource or value whose conservation is: (a) Necessary to fulfill 
specific purposes identified in the establishing legislation or 
proclamation of the park; (b) Key to the natural or cultural integrity 
of the park or to opportunities for enjoyment of the park; or (c) 
Identified as a goal in the park's general management plan or other 
relevant National Park Service planning documents.'' (NPS Management 
Policies, 2001).
    This policy does not prohibit impacts to park resources and values. 
The NPS has the discretion to allow impacts to park resources and 
values when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the purposes of a 
park, so long as the impacts do not constitute impairment. Moreover, an 
impact is less likely to constitute impairment if it is an unavoidable 
result of an action necessary to preserve or restore the integrity of 
park resources or values.
    Human activity and past development have resulted in the ongoing 
disruption of natural systems and processes in Death Valley National 
Park for generations. The no-action alternative would result in future 
unplanned and uncoordinated actions that are merely reactive to 
immediate concerns. Furthermore, these actions would likely be 
responsive to immediate, short-term, adverse impacts that demand 
attention, but may result in long term impairment to park values and 
resources. Thus, the ability of the public to experience, understand, 
appreciate, and enjoy the park could be impaired under the no-action 
alternative.
    The NPS has determined that implementing Alternative 1 will not 
constitute an impairment to Death Valley National Park's resources and 
values. This conclusion is based on a thorough analysis of the 
environmental impacts described in the Revised Draft EIS/GMP, the 
Abbreviated Final EIS/GMP, the public comments received, relevant 
scientific studies, and the professional judgment of the decision-maker 
guided by the direction in NPS Management Policies. While the plan may 
result in some minor negative impacts, in all cases these adverse 
impacts are the result of proactive strategies intended to implement 
the NPS mission, policies, and regulations in the management of Death 
Valley National Park. None of the proposals would result in impacts 
that would impair the integrity of park resources or values, including 
opportunities that would otherwise be present for the enjoyment of 
those resources or values. Overall, the plan results in major, long-
term benefits to park resources and values and opportunities for their 
enjoyment; it does not result in their impairment.
    The actions comprising Alternative 1 will achieve the goals of the 
California Desert Protection Act and NPS management policies (which 
include protecting and enhancing the natural and cultural resources of 
Death Valley and providing opportunities for high-quality, resource-
based visitor experiences) in a comprehensive, integrated manner that 
takes into account the interplay between resource protection and 
visitor use. Actions implemented under Alternative 1 that would cause 
overall negligible adverse impacts, minor adverse impacts, short term 
impacts, and beneficial impacts to park resources and values, as 
described in the Revised Draft EIS/GMP and the Abbreviated Final EIS/
GMP, will not constitute impairment. This is because these impacts have 
limited severity and/or duration and will not result in appreciable 
irreversible commitments of resources. Beneficial effects identified 
during the NEPA process include effects related to removal of exotic 
burros and protecting threatened park resources and values. Beneficial 
effects do not constitute impairment.
    The collective actions discussed in Alternative 1 are proposed as a 
means of managing Death Valley National Park in a manner that would 
result in a protected native desert ecosystem that functions without 
interference from human activities, while allowing visitor use and 
Congressionally mandated resource consumptive activities. While some of 
these activities may seem contrary to the NPS preservation mission 
(e.g. grazing, mining), Congress specifically provides for these 
activities (under NPS regulation) in the park pursuant to the 
California Desert Protection Act. These activities may only be allowed 
subject to other applicable laws and regulations. This proposal 
outlines management strategies for these activities, and others, that 
would be implemented to minimize potential impacts from these 
activities to levels below the threshold of impairment. For example, 
all future mining operations would be required to undergo NPS review 
and impact analysis under 36 CFR part 9, subpart A. Also, a grazing 
management plan would

[[Page 13798]]

be developed to manage the one remaining cattle grazing permit so that 
park resources are protected. The proposed actions included in this 
alternative would establish an overall management approach that would 
allow activities to occur in the park without impairing the integrity 
of park resources or values, including opportunities that would 
otherwise be present for the enjoyment of those resources or values.
    In addition, the NPS has determined that the environmentally 
preferable alternative is Alternative 1. In aggregate, Alternative 1 
best achieves the six conditions prescribed under Sec. 101 of NEPA. 
While some of the actions in other alternatives may be similar to 
Alternative 1 in their effect and consequence, Alternative 1: (1) 
Provides the highest level of protection of natural and cultural 
resources while concurrently attaining the widest range of beneficial 
uses of the environment without degradation; (2) maintains an 
environment that supports diversity and variety of individual choice; 
and (3) integrates resource protection with opportunities for an 
appropriate range of visitor uses.
    Measures to Minimize Environmental Harm: The NPS investigated all 
practical means to avoid or minimize environmental impacts that could 
result from implementating the various actions. The measures are fully 
incorporated into Alternative 1 (as analyzed in the Revised Draft EIS/
GMP and the Abbreviated Final EIS/GMP (see Appendix E in Revised Draft 
EIS/GMP). Monitoring and enforcement programs will supplement the 
implementation of mitigation measures. These programs will assure 
compliance monitoring, biological and cultural resource protection, 
traffic management, noise and dust abatement, noxious weed control, 
pollution prevention measures, visitor safety and education, and other 
mitigation measures. Mitigation measures will also be applied to all 
future actions that are guided by this plan. In addition, the NPS will 
conduct specific compliance reviews (i.e., National Environmental 
Policy Act, Wilderness Act, National Historic Preservation Act, 
Endangered Species Act, and other relevant legislation) for any future 
actions.
    Background of Planning Process: This extensive conservation 
planning effort was prompted by the enactment of the California Desert 
Protection Act (CDPA) on October 31, 1994. CDPA transferred over 3 
million acres of California desert lands from the Bureau of Land 
Management (BLM) to the NPS and designated nearly 8 million acres of 
Wilderness on NPS and BLM lands. In addition, CDPA redesignated Death 
Valley as a national park (likewise Joshua Tree National Park, and 
Mojave National Preserve was created). Wide ranging changes confronting 
the management of the public lands in the California desert, including 
increasing wildland development, mounting public use pressures, the 
formal listing of the desert tortoise, and passage of CDPA itself 
prompted NPS, BLM, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service desert managers 
to address these and other anticipated changes through development of 
updated or new management plans.
    The significant expansion of Death Valley National Park with 1.3 
million additional acres and the designation of over 95% of the park's 
lands as Wilderness clearly warranted the development of a new general 
management plan (GMP) to update and replace a 1989 GMP written for the 
former Monument. The GMP will serve as the overall management strategy 
for the next 10-15 years, and is a ``blueprint'' under which more 
detailed activity or implementation plans are to be prepared (the new 
GMP is general rather than specific in nature, and focuses on purposes 
of the unit, significant attributes, overall mission of the agency, 
what activities are appropriate within these constraints, resource 
protection strategies, provides guidelines for visitor use and 
development of facilities for visitor enjoyment and administration of 
the park). The goal of the GMP is to determine how best to manage the 
park to meet Congressional intent as expressed in the CDPA and the 
mission of the NPS. It was the stated intention of this conservation 
planning effort to explore only alternatives that would result in an 
implementable management plan for the park. Alternatives that would 
require legislation before they could be implemented, were contrary to 
specific Congressional direction or NPS regulations or policy, or 
require vast sums of funding to implement, would create unreasonable 
expectations on the part of the public and would not serve the need of 
creating an implementable management plan for this unit. Therefore, 
only alternatives that explore the range of options for managing uses 
mandated by Congress were evaluated.
    Preparation of this GMP began in 1995 with the selection and 
stationing of a planning team in Barstow, California. The Notice of 
Intent was published in the Federal Register on September 5, 1995. The 
planning team conducted 20 public scoping meetings in September 1995 
and April 1997 to gather public input on the management direction for 
the park and BLM lands. In addition, a number of agency scoping 
meetings were held. From this input and meetings with interested 
parties (such as county departments, special interest groups, state 
agencies, Native American tribes, etc.) and discussions with NPS and 
BLM staff, proposed management plans were developed.
    In September 1998 the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/General 
Management Plan (EIS/GMP) was released for public review. Approximately 
450 printed copies (and 100 CD-ROMs) of the Draft EIS/GMP were 
distributed for review; the entire document was also posted on the 
internet with links from the park's homepage and the Northern and 
Eastern Mojave planning page. The notice of filing of the Draft EIS/GMP 
was published in the Federal Register by the Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) on September 11, 1998 (FR 48727). Written comments were 
accepted from September 11, 1998, through January 15, 1999, a period of 
127 days. Eleven public meetings were held in October 1998 throughout 
the planning region of southern California and southern Nevada. In 
addition, the planning team participated in numerous meetings of the 
Death Valley Advisory Commission to obtain their feedback, concerns, 
and direction regarding the development of the GMP. Death Valley 
received approximately 600 comment letters from government agencies, 
tribes, interest groups, and individuals. In addition, members of 
environmental groups sent approximately 1,800 identical postcards. 
Several additional letters and postcards were received after the 
closing date for public comments.
    Due to the large number of substantial changes required as a result 
of public comment on the 1998 Draft EIS/GMP, the NPS decided to rewrite 
the document. In September 2000, a Revised Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement and General Management Plan was released for 92 days of 
public review. Responses to written public comments on the 1998 Draft 
EIS/GMP were addressed in a separately bound report. A notice of filing 
was published in the Federal Register by the EPA on September 6, 2000 
(FR 54062-54064). Eleven more public meetings on the revised materials 
were held in southern California and southern Nevada during October and 
November 2000. During the public comment period, a total of 47 written 
comments were received. All substantive comments on the 1998 Draft 
DEIS/GMP were addressed in a separate document that was made available 
concurrent with the Revised EIS/GMP.

[[Page 13799]]

    After consideration of substantive public comments on the Revised 
EIS/GMP (which surfaced no new major issues or information gaps), the 
NPS decided to prepare an Abbreviated Final Environmental Impact 
Statement and General Management Plan, dated June 2001. The abbreviated 
format was used because changes to the revised draft document were 
minor and confined primarily to factual corrections, which do not 
modify the analysis. This abbreviated format requires that the material 
be integrated with the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement and 
General Management Plan to comprise the full record of the 
environmental impact analysis and public comment.
    Conclusion: Alternative 1 provides the most comprehensive and 
proactive strategy among the alternatives considered for meeting the 
NPS's purposes, goals, and criteria for managing Death Valley National 
Park in accordance with Congressional direction, federal laws, and NPS 
management policies. The selection of Alternative 1, as reflected by 
the analysis contained in the environmental impact statement, would not 
result in the impairment of park resources and would allow the NPS to 
conserve park resources and provide for their enjoyment by visitors. To 
obtain a copy of the Presentation Plan document when it becomes 
available, or for the complete Record of Decision at this time, 
requests may be sent to the Superintendent, Death Valley National Park, 
Death Valley, California, 92328.

    Dated: September 27, 2001.
Patricia L. Neubacher,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 02-7248 Filed 3-25-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P