[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 118 (Tuesday, June 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35703-35705]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-12207]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Merced Wild and Scenic River Revised Comprehensive Management 
Plan and Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement; Yosemite 
National Park; Tuolumne, Mariposa, and Madera Counties, California; 
Notice of Availability

    Summary: Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190, as amended), the 
Council of Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR part 1500), and 
the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1271), the 
National Park Service, Department of the Interior, has prepared the 
Final Merced Wild and Scenic River Revised Comprehensive Management 
Plan and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (Final Revised 
Merced River Plan/SEIS). It is intended to amend and supplement the 
Merced

[[Page 35704]]

Wild and Scenic River Comprehensive Management Plan and Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (Merced River Plan/FEIS) released in 
June 2000. The Final Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS identifies and 
evaluates four alternatives for guiding management of the Merced Wild 
and Scenic River within the jurisdiction of the National Park Service 
in Yosemite and the El Portal Administrative Site. Potential impacts 
and appropriate mitigation measures are assessed for each alternative. 
When approved, the plan will serve as a template for all future 
decisions relating to recreation and land use within the 81-mile Merced 
River corridor on both the main stem and South Fork. The primary goals 
of the plan are to ensure the free-flowing condition of the river, 
along with providing long-term protection and enhancement of what the 
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act calls the river's ``Outstandingly Remarkable 
Values'' the unique qualities that make the river worthy of special 
protection.
    Purpose and Need for Federal Action: The Merced River Plan is the 
official document for guiding future management of the main stem and 
South Fork of the Merced Wild and Scenic River within the jurisdiction 
of the National Park Service (NPS). In August 2000, the Merced River 
Plan/FEIS was approved (the Record of Decision was subsequently revised 
in November 2000). Shortly after the Record of Decision was signed, the 
plan became the subject of a lengthy litigation process. In April 2004, 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit directed the NPS to 
prepare a ``new or revised'' comprehensive management plan that 
addresses two deficiencies identified in the Court's October 27, 2003 
opinion (Friends of Yosemite Valley v. Norton, 348 F.3d 789, 803 9th 
Cir. 2003). The Court ruled that: (1) The revised plan must implement a 
user capacity program that presents specific measurable limits on use, 
and (2) the revised plan must reassess the river corridor boundary in 
the El Portal Administrative Site based on the location of 
Outstandingly Remarkable Values. The programmatic guidance identified 
herein would revise and supplement the Merced River Plan/FEIS and the 
park's 1980 General Management Plan.
    Proposed Plan and Alternatives: In the proposed Revised Merced 
River Plan, Alternative 2 (agency preferred alternative) would include 
all of the elements of the No Action Alternative, with the addition of 
implementing the Visitor Experience Resource Protection (VERP) user 
capacity component, along with interim limits on some park facilities; 
the El Portal segment boundary would be redrawn to a quarter-mile on 
either side of the river. In addition to this proposed plan, the Final 
Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS identifies and analyzes three other 
alternatives: Alternative 1--No Action; Alternative 3--Segment Limits 
with VERP Program; and Alternative 4--Management Zone Limits with VERP 
Program. Alternative 2 has also been deemed to be the ``environmentally 
preferable'' alternative.
    The No Action Alternative represents a baseline from which to 
compare the three action alternatives. Under Alternative 1, the Merced 
River Plan--as detailed in the 2000 Record of Decision (and subsequent 
revision)--would continue to guide management in the river corridor. 
Application of its management elements (boundaries, classifications, 
Outstandingly Remarkable Values, management zoning, River Protection 
Overlay, Section 7 determination process) would continue as presented 
in the plan. However, a program of standards and indicators under the 
Visitor Experience Resource Protection (VERP) framework would not be in 
place and the park would continue managing user capacity under existing 
programs and policies outlined in the February 2004 User Capacity 
Program for the Merced Wild and Scenic River Corridor. This program 
includes continuation of the current wilderness management program and 
existing Wilderness Trailhead Quota System. Alternative 1 would 
implement the narrow boundary for the El Portal segment as described in 
the selected alternative of the Merced River Plan/FEIS (100-year 
floodplain or River Protection Overlay [whichever is greater] along 
with adjacent wetlands).
    Alternative 3 would also include all of the elements from the No 
Action alternative, in addition to a VERP user capacity component (as 
described in Alternative 2), along with a maximum daily limit for each 
river segment and an annual visitation limit of 5.32 million; the El 
Portal segment would have the maximum quarter-mile boundary.
    Alternative 4 would contain the elements of No Action in addition 
to a VERP user capacity component (as described in Alternative 2), 
along with limits for each river management zone and an annual 
visitation limit of 3.27 million; the El Portal segment boundary would 
be drawn according to the location of Outstandingly Remarkable Values.
    Planning Background: The draft and final Revised Merced River Plan/
SEIS were prepared pursuant to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and 
National Environmental Policy Act. On July 27, 2004, a Notice of Intent 
to prepare an environmental impact statement was published in the 
Federal Register. At this time, a 30-day scoping period was initiated. 
In response to public comment, this scoping period was extended to 
September 10, 2004. During scoping, a series of public meetings were 
held. A letter from the Superintendent was sent to over 8,000 
interested members of the public on the park's Planning Mailing list, 
encouraging them to submit ideas, issues, and concerns relating to the 
scope of this planning effort. In addition, the scoping period and 
associated public meetings were publicized via regional media, on the 
park's Web site, through emailed notices on the park's electronic 
newsletter, and on various state-wide online bulletin boards. Over 100 
letters, faxes, and emails were received and considered during the 
development of the Draft Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS. All written 
scoping comments, as well as oral testimony from public hearings, can 
be viewed on the park's Web site (http://www.nps.gov/yose/planning/mrp/revision). A scoping report is also available.
    On January 14, 2005, a Notice of Availability for the Draft Merced 
Wild and Scenic River Revised Comprehensive Management Plan 
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement was published in the 
Federal Register. The public review period continued through March 22, 
2005. Approximately 1,500 printed copies and 600 CD-ROM versions of the 
draft SEIS were mailed to interested individuals and organizations. In 
February and March 2005, a series of public meetings was held in 
locations throughout California to discuss the draft document. During 
the public comment period, eleven public meetings were hosted 
throughout California between February 22, 2005 and March 7, 2005. 
Meetings were held at El Portal, San Francisco, Burbank, Oakhurst, 
Mammoth Lakes, Sacramento, Fresno, Merced, Mariposa, Groveland and in 
Yosemite Valley. An additional Open House was hosted in Yosemite Valley 
prior to the end of the public comment period. Each public meeting was 
set up to allow for (1) informal conversations between park staff 
(including consultants) and the public, (2) a presentation by park 
staff on the plan's proposed elements, and (3) a formal public hearing 
attended by a court reporter. The public was encouraged to submit 
written comments on the Draft

[[Page 35705]]

Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS via letter, email or fax. Attendees 
could also leave written comments on comment forms provided at the 
meetings.
    The NPS contacted local, regional, and national media outlets, 
issued press releases that were faxed and emailed to media outlets and 
phone calls that were made to newspaper and news reporters to generate 
interest in the plan. In addition, paid newspaper advertisements were 
placed in the Mariposa Gazette, the Sierra Star (Oakhurst, CA), the 
Union Democrat (Sonora, CA), the Merced Sun-Star and the Mammoth Times. 
Paid public notices were placed in the San Francisco Chronicle, the 
L.A. Times, the Sacramento Bee, and the Fresno Bee. Numerous stories 
about the plan and the schedule of public meetings appeared in local 
and regional newspapers. In addition, several project fact sheets were 
posted on the park's Web site; fliers were posted on community bulletin 
boards, post offices, and local businesses in communities where public 
meetings were hosted; and press release announcements were included in 
the park's Daily Report throughout the entire comment period. The park 
specifically initiated dialogue with several interested local parties. 
These included park employees and their families, Delaware North 
Companies Parks and Resorts at Yosemite (primary concessioner) 
employees and residents, and park partner staff such as the Yosemite 
Institute, the Yosemite Association, and The Yosemite Fund. In 
addition, there was extensive outreach within the local communities of 
El Portal and Wawona through participation at local Mariposa County 
Planning Advisory Committee meetings. The park also conducted a 
``walking tour'' in El Portal to discuss the process for identifying 
Outstandingly Remarkable Values within the El Portal segment of the 
Merced River and the rationale for the various El Portal boundary 
alternatives. The NPS engaged gateway communities throughout the 
process through personal communications and meetings between the park 
staff and gateway community members.
    As a result of the public review period, the NPS received comments 
from 114 individuals, 25 organizations, 6 government agencies, 2 tribes 
and 1 university, including public testimony given by individuals at 
public meetings. Over 900 individual comments were received. The 
analysis of these comments generated about 400 concerns statements, 
which were categorized and considered for incorporation in the planning 
process. The public comments received and transcripts from the public 
hearings are available for viewing on the park Web site (http://www.nps.gov/yose/planning/mrp/revision). The Public Comment Analysis 
and Response Report is included as Appendix F in the Final SEIS.
    Distribution of Final Revised Merced River Plan/SEIS: A mail-back 
postcard was sent to all individuals and organizations on the park's 
general mailing list asking recipients if they would like to receive a 
printed copy or CD-ROM version (or both) of the Final Revised Merced 
River Plan/SEIS. This announcement also indicated that the plan would 
be available for viewing on the park's Web site (http://www.nps.gov/yose/planning). Copies of the final plan will also be available at the 
National Park Service headquarters in Yosemite Valley, the Yosemite 
Valley Research Library, the National Park Service warehouse building 
in El Portal, and at a number local and regional libraries (listed in 
Chapter VI of the Final SEIS).
    Decision Process: Depending upon the response from other agencies, 
interested organizations, and the general public, at this time it is 
anticipated that a Record of Decision would be approved not sooner than 
at least 30 days have elapsed after publication by the EPA of their 
filing notice for the Final Revised MRP/SEIS. Notice of the approved 
decision will be posted in the Federal Register and announced in local 
and regional media. As a delegated EIS, the official responsible for 
the decision is the Regional Director, Pacific West Region, National 
Park Service; subsequently the official responsible for implementing 
the approved Revised Merced River Plan is the Superintendent, Yosemite 
National Park.

    Dated: May 18, 2005.
Jonathan B. Jarvis,
Regional Director, Pacific West Region.
[FR Doc. 05-12207 Filed 6-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-52-P