[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 127 (Friday, July 1, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43226-43228]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-15526]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[LLCON06000 L16100000.DQ0000]


Notice of Availability of the Proposed Resource Management Plan 
and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Dominguez-Escalante 
National Conservation Area, Colorado

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969, as amended, and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
1976, as amended, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has prepared a 
Proposed Resource Management Plan (RMP)/Final Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for the Dominguez-Escalante National Conservation Area 
(D-E NCA) located in Mesa, Delta and Montrose counties in Colorado and 
by this notice is announcing its availability.

DATES: The BLM planning regulations state that any person who meets the 
conditions as described in the regulations may protest the BLM's 
Proposed RMP/Final EIS. A person who meets the conditions and files a 
protest must file the protest within 30 days of the date that the 
Environmental Protection Agency publishes its notice of availability in 
the Federal Register.

[[Page 43227]]


ADDRESSES: Copies of the Dominguez-Escalante National Conservation Area 
Proposed RMP/Final EIS have been sent to affected Federal, State and 
local government agencies; tribal governments; and other stakeholders. 
Copies of the Proposed RMP/Final EIS are available for public 
inspection at the Grand Junction Field Office, 2815 H Road, Grand 
Junction, CO 81506; and the BLM's Uncompahgre Field Office at 2465 
South Townsend Ave., Montrose, CO 81401. Interested persons may also 
review the Proposed RMP/Final EIS on the Internet at http://www.blm.gov/co/st/en/nca/denca/denca_rmp.html. All protests must be in 
writing and mailed to one of the following addresses:
    Regular Mail: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest Coordinator, 
P.O. Box 71383, Washington, DC 20024-1383.
    Overnight Delivery: BLM Director (210), Attention: Protest 
Coordinator, 20 M Street SE., Room 2134LM, Washington, DC 20003.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Collin Ewing, NCA Manager, telephone 
970-244-3049; address Grand Junction Field Office (see address above); 
email [email protected]. Persons who use a telecommunications device for 
the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 
1-800-877-8339 to contact the above individual during normal business 
hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to 
leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive 
a reply during normal business hours.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The D-E NCA planning area includes 
approximately 218,000 acres of State, private and BLM-managed lands 
located in Delta, Mesa and Montrose counties in western Colorado. 
Within the D-E NCA planning area, the BLM administers approximately 
210,000 acres of Federal surface and subsurface estate. Management 
decisions made as a result of the RMP will apply only to the BLM-
administered lands in the D-E NCA planning area. The D-E NCA was 
established by the Omnibus Public Lands Management Act of 2009. The D-E 
NCA is currently managed under the 1987 Grand Junction Record of 
Decision (ROD) and Approved RMP, as amended; the 1989 Uncompahgre Basin 
ROD and Approved RMP, as amended; and the BLM's 2010 Interim Management 
Policy for the D-E NCA and Dominguez Canyon Wilderness. When approved, 
this RMP will replace all of these existing plans for the D-E NCA 
planning area.
    The Draft RMP and Draft EIS public comment period, which began on 
May 17, 2013, and ended September 23, 2013, included a 45-day extension 
in response to requests from the public. The total comment period 
encompassed 129 days.
    The Proposed RMP/Final EIS describes and analyzes five management 
alternatives, each of which includes objectives and management actions 
to address management challenges and issues, including the conservation 
and protection of the unique and important resources that were 
identified as purposes of the area's designation.
    Alternative A is the no action alternative and would retain the 
current management goals, objectives and direction specified in the 
1987 Grand Junction RMP and 1989 Uncompahgre Basin RMP, where the 
management is consistent with the Omnibus Act.
    Alternative B focuses on allowing natural processes to influence 
the condition of resources, which would involve placing additional 
restrictions on allowable uses to manage the D-E NCA. Recreation would 
be managed largely through Extensive Recreation Management Areas, where 
the BLM would commit to providing activity opportunities but not 
specific recreation outcomes or settings. Alternative C emphasizes 
active management for biological restoration and cultural resource 
protection. The BLM would set objectives that provide a high level of 
resource protection and restoration. Only two areas would be managed as 
Special Recreation Management Areas, with the rest of the D-E NCA not 
managed as recreation areas. Alternative D would also emphasize an 
active management approach for biological restoration and cultural 
resource protection, but with objectives that provide a lower level of 
restoration and protection for these resources as compared to 
Alternative C. Resource uses, particularly trail-based recreation and 
livestock grazing, would be emphasized. The Proposed RMP is based upon 
the Preferred Alternative (E) identified in the Draft. Alternative E 
from the draft was largely a combination of management approaches 
already considered under alternatives A through D. The Proposed RMP 
also includes changes from the draft in response to public comments and 
advisory council recommendations. Public comments identified 
opportunities to better resolve conflicts or impacts as well as 
identified parts of the EIS in need of greater clarity. As with the 
Draft Preferred Alternative, the Proposed RMP would set objectives for 
biological resources that are more ambitious than those in Alternative 
D but less ambitious than those in Alternative C. As with Alternatives 
C and D, a wide range of tools would be available to achieve these 
objectives.
    The Proposed RMP would provide comprehensive, long-range decisions 
for the use and management of resources in the D-E NCA, focusing on the 
conservation and protection of the unique and important resources that 
were identified as purposes of the area's designation.
    The Proposed RMP includes: goals, objectives, management actions, 
allowable use, and implementation decisions to ensure future BLM 
management supports the protection of two Areas of Critical 
Environmental Concern, four Special Recreation Management Areas, 
Extensive Recreation Management Areas, Wilderness Study Areas, the Old 
Spanish National Historic Trail, and a stream segment, Cottonwood 
Creek, which was found suitable for inclusion in the National Wild and 
Scenic River System. The following is a brief summary of the Wild and 
Scenic Rivers study process findings: of the 147.6 miles of 8 streams 
inventoried, 64.4 miles were found ineligible and 83.2 miles were found 
eligible; of the 83.2 eligible stream miles, 69.1 miles were determined 
non-suitable and 14.1 miles were determined suitable for inclusion in 
the National Wild and Scenic River System. Maps are included to 
illustrate the Proposed RMP as well as the other alternatives 
considered in the Final EIS.
    The D-E NCA is withdrawn from all the mineral laws and BLM expects 
very little ground disturbance. The proposed plan alternative includes 
mitigation to protect soils, wildlife and habitat (e.g., measures to 
reduce risk of disease transmission from domestic sheep to wild bighorn 
sheep), a national trail management corridor to protect the Old Spanish 
National Historic Trail, and protections relevant to the National 
Historic Preservation Act.
    The BLM made changes to the Proposed RMP/Final EIS in response to 
public comment on the Draft RMP/Draft EIS in addition to cooperating 
agency reviews, advisory council reviews, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service consultation, and extensive internal BLM reviews of the 
Proposed RMP/Final EIS. The BLM carefully considered all comments and 
incorporated them into the Proposed RMP as appropriate. Public comments 
resulted in the addition of clarifying text, but did not constitute a 
substantial change that would require a supplemental EIS.
    Instructions for filing a protest with the Director of the BLM 
regarding the Proposed RMP/Final EIS may be found in the ``Dear 
Reader'' Letter of the D-E

[[Page 43228]]

NCA Proposed RMP/Final EIS and at 43 CFR 1610.5-2. All protests must be 
in writing and mailed to the appropriate address, as set forth in the 
ADDRESSES section above. Emailed protests will not be accepted as valid 
protests unless the protesting party also provides the original letter 
by either regular or overnight mail postmarked by the close of the 
protest period. Under these conditions, the BLM will consider the 
emailed protest as an advance copy and it will receive full 
consideration. If you wish to provide the BLM with such advance 
notification, please direct emails to [email protected].
    Unlike land use planning decisions, implementation decisions 
included in this Proposed RMP/Final EIS are not subject to protest 
under the BLM planning regulations, but are subject to an 
administrative review process through appeals to the Office of Hearings 
and Appeals, Interior Board of Land Appeals, pursuant to 43 CFR part 4 
Subpart E. Implementation decisions generally constitute the BLM's 
final approval allowing on-the-ground actions to proceed. Where 
implementation decisions are made as part of the land use planning 
process, they are subject to the appeals process or other 
administrative review as prescribed by specific resource program 
regulations once the BLM resolves the protests to land use planning 
decisions and issues an Approved RMP and ROD. The Approved RMP and ROD 
will, therefore, identify the implementation decisions made in the plan 
that may be appealed to the Office of Hearing and Appeals.
    Before including your phone number, email address, or other 
personal identifying information in your protest, you should be aware 
that your entire protest--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your protest to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

    Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2, 43 CFR 
1610.5.

Ruth Welch,
BLM Colorado State Director.
[FR Doc. 2016-15526 Filed 6-30-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4310-JB-P