[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 145 (Friday, July 29, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45796-45799]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-16296]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[L16100000.DQ0000.LXLUGSEM0000.LLUTPO1000]


Notice of Intent To Prepare a Resource Management Plan for the 
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah and an Associated 
Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969, as amended (NEPA), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
1976, as amended (FLPMA), and Presidential Proclamation 10286, the 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Utah State Director intends to revise a 
Resource Management Plan (RMP) with an associated Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) for the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument 
(GSENM) and by this notice is announcing the beginning of the scoping 
period to solicit public comments and identify issues, is providing the 
planning criteria for public review, and is issuing a call for 
nominations for areas of critical environmental concern (ACECs). The 
RMP revision would replace the existing 2020 GSENM RMP and 2020 Kanab-
Escalante Planning Area RMP.

DATES: The BLM requests the public submit comments concerning the scope 
of the analysis, potential alternatives, and identification of relevant 
information, studies, and ACEC nominations by September 27, 2022. To 
afford the BLM the opportunity to consider this information and ACEC 
nominations raised by commenters in the Draft RMP/EIS, please ensure 
your comments are received prior to the close of the 60-day scoping 
period or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever is later.
    The BLM also requests the public submit comments on the planning 
criteria by the same date identified above. The planning criteria will 
be made available to the public within the first 30 days of the 60-day 
comment period to ensure the public has at least 30 days to comment on 
the planning criteria as required by the planning regulations at 43 CFR 
1610.2(e). To afford the BLM the opportunity to consider this 
information and ACEC nominations raised by commenters in the Draft RMP/
EIS, please ensure your comments are received prior to the close of the 
60-day scoping period or 15 days after the last public meeting, 
whichever is later.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on issues and planning criteria 
related to the GSENM RMP and nominations of new ACECs by any of the 
following methods:

 Website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2020343/510
 Mail: ATTN: GSENM RMP Project Manager, BLM Paria River 
District, 669 S Highway 89A, Kanab, UT 84741

    Documents pertinent to this proposal may be examined online at 
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/2020343/510 and at the 
BLM Paria River District Office, 669 US-89A, Kanab, Utah 84741.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott M. Whitesides, Project Manager, 
telephone 801-539-4054; address Bureau of Land Management Utah, 440 
West 200 South Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101; email 
[email protected]. Contact Mr. Whitesides to have your name added to 
our mailing list. Individuals in the United States who are deaf, 
deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 
(TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services 
for contacting Mr. Whitesides. Individuals outside the United States 
should use the relay services offered within their country to make 
international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document provides notice that the BLM 
Utah State Director intends to prepare an RMP with an associated EIS 
for GSENM, announces the beginning of the scoping process, seeks public 
input on issues and relevant planning criteria, and invites the public 
to nominate ACECs. The planning area is located in Kane and Garfield 
counties and encompasses approximately 1.87 million acres of public 
land.

Purpose and Need for the RMP

    This RMP will provide a management framework, including goals, 
objectives, and management direction, to guide Monument management. 
Purposes and needs serve to frame issue identification, alternatives 
development, and effects analyses. The following purposes and desired 
outcomes are set forward explicitly in Presidential Proclamation 10286 
or have been identified based on key present and historical GSENM 
management challenges. Planning for these desired outcomes will be 
crucial for development of an RMP that provides direction for 
addressing critical management challenges. Associated needs and 
challenges that the RMP will address are also summarized.
    1. Protect and restore the entirety of the large, remote, rugged, 
and markedly impenetrable landscapes, including dark skies and natural 
soundscapes. The Monument's fundamental values and objects include a 
rich mosaic of objects of natural, historic, and scientific interest.
    Needs and challenges: The immense scale and unspoiled naturalness 
of the Monument serves as a foundation for the rest of the Monument 
objects and values, including the diversity of ecotypes and extent and 
diversity of geological and paleontological resources, vegetation, and 
wildlife. Through the latter half of the 20th century, Utah's large 
extent of unspoiled natural, roadless areas was unique in the lower 48 
states, ultimately providing for the 1996 GSENM proclamation. Monument 
visitation is steadily increasing, mostly due to recreational use. 
International and regional tourism is rising, and Utah is the state 
with the fastest growing population in the last decade (18.4%); in 2021 
Utah's growth was 1.7% while the national population growth was 0.1%. 
These increases in human presence pose diverse challenges to 
preservation of resources (e.g., vegetation and soil impacts, loss of 
potential for human solitude, adverse effects on certain wildlife 
species, increases in noise). Effects such as these tend to be 
incremental, and gradual degradation of resources over time can easily 
occur, almost unnoticed, without adequate management sidebars, as well 
as overall management goals and objectives for the landscape as a 
whole. Avoidance of incremental degradation, so that the unique value 
of a largely unspoiled, natural landscape is retained given ongoing 
multiple uses, warrants substantial consideration in the planning 
process.

[[Page 45797]]

    2. Emphasize the Monument as a living, outdoor laboratory to be 
used for diverse and significant research and discovery related to the 
Monument's varied resources, objects, and values.
    Needs and challenges: The proclamation that originally designated 
the Monument in 1996 explained, ``Even today, this unspoiled natural 
area remains a frontier, a quality that greatly enhances the monument's 
value for scientific study.'' However, the circumstances surrounding 
and within the Monument have changed substantially in the past 25 years 
(see purpose 1, above). There are substantial management challenges 
regarding how to maintain the unspoiled naturalness, which is essential 
to the Monument's purposes of science. Given the intensification of 
anthropogenic change in the world, natural refugia on the scale of this 
Monument are increasingly essential, rare, and hard to maintain. Areas 
such as the Monument are a cornerstone for scientific understanding of 
the past, and they are equally important for understanding changes and 
trends that allow us to appropriately plan for the future.
    3. Protect and restore biological resources including five life 
zones, a variety of habitats, and multiple eco-regions, due largely to 
the remoteness and substantial variation in elevation and topography of 
the Monument. The Monument contains unique and isolated plant 
communities, various floristic communities, relic and endemic plants, 
diverse wildlife including unique species of invertebrates, and a 
biodiversity of bees, as well as amphibians, birds, and mammals 
including mountain lion and desert bighorn sheep.
    Needs and challenges: Management of living individuals, 
populations, and interconnected communities and ecosystems must address 
a spectrum of needs and challenges. The Monument supports a range of 
ecotypes, as well as remnant, relic, and refugia populations across the 
landscape's substantial ranges of elevation and large geographic 
extent. Additionally, climate change and drought are outside the 
historic range of variability, affecting vegetation and thereby habitat 
and species. A key component of this planning effort will be 
identification of appropriate management for changing ecotypes and 
populations, especially given the scientific emphasis of this Monument.
    4. Protect and restore the historical and cultural understanding 
and appreciation related to Monument objects and values. These objects 
and values include an exceedingly high density of archaeological sites, 
modern tribal uses, numerous historic routes and trails including 
Powell expedition routes and Mormon pioneer trails, historic 
inscriptions, ghost towns, cowboy line camps, and historic townsites.
    This topic focuses on restoration, retention, and education/
appreciation of historic and cultural resources.
    Needs and challenges: Protection, restoration, identification, and 
appreciation of such objects and values often requires substantial on-
the-ground work, such as inventories, stabilization work, and sometimes 
development of educational interpretive materials. The RMP planning 
process should clarify how to select and prioritize such efforts, as 
well as consider the role of collaboration with outside entities and 
consultation with Tribal Nations that could both (1) further the aims 
of understanding and appreciation of these resources and (2) support 
the work of protection and restoration.
    5. Protect the Monument's varied geology and associated scenery 
with numerous unique areas and features and abundant, important 
paleontological resources. The entire landscape affords extraordinary 
visual landscapes and rich geologic and world-class paleontological 
resources. Reasonably accommodate challenges of remote paleontological 
research (e.g., transport of large fossils).
    Needs and challenges: Extensive scenic exploration can be accessed 
via paved roads, which serve as the main arteries through the Monument. 
Paved roads are augmented by several maintained, unpaved roads and some 
lesser dirt roads. Scenic geology itself, and the opportunity for 
visual appreciation, is relatively easy to preserve, while other uses 
of these resources, for example scientific study and personal 
collection, will require consideration during planning in order to 
provide for appropriate access, use, and protection. This is important 
in view of the scientific purposes of the Monument.
    6. Protect and restore world-class outdoor recreation 
opportunities, including hiking and backpacking, hunting, canyoneering, 
mountain biking, and horseback riding associated with a substantial, 
regional socioeconomic sector. Serve visitors via several visitor 
centers with diverse emphases, as well as provide basic facilities to 
ensure human health and safety (e.g., restrooms).
    Needs and challenges: The majority of the direct human visitation 
to the Monument is recreational. While not identified as an object in 
need of protection, Proclamation 10286 acknowledges the world class 
recreational opportunities within the monument that support a travel 
and tourism sector that is a source of economic opportunity for the 
region. However, high and increasing levels of recreational visitation 
are a top management challenge, and appropriate management of 
recreational use is a central concern to be addressed by the RMP. Large 
numbers of visitors can degrade visitor experience, raise human safety 
and health issues (such as related to human waste), and may harm 
ecologically sensitive areas and species. Challenges in finding a 
balance between Proclamation objectives and rapidly rising visitation 
levels means that use quotas or other mitigating management actions 
will be considered. Additionally, substantial step-down recreation 
planning is needed, such as for Special Recreation Management Areas. 
Yet such planning has never occurred on the Monument due to the 
substantial time and resources it requires.
    7. Protect and restore Monument objects and values within a 
multiple-use context. Monument lands have served multiple-use purposes 
since Anglo settlement in what is now the State of Utah. Such uses 
include, for example, grazing, hunting, and recreating. Monument lands 
were a combination of BLM and Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands 
Administration lands prior to Monument designation. Some of these lands 
were being used related to mining, rock hounding for alabaster, and 
other purposes.
    Needs and challenges: Since the time of Monument designation in 
1996, controversy and disputes have existed among stakeholders 
regarding BLM's discretionary uses. Such controversy spans the spectrum 
of use: allowing for uses such as mining and livestock grazing while 
also supporting conservation and recreation uses and promoting strong 
preservation interests. Establishing management that ensures protection 
of monument objects and values and serves other monument purposes while 
accommodating other uses, as appropriate, is vital in this planning 
process.

Preliminary Alternatives

    The BLM will be analyzing alternatives that explore and evaluate 
different ways of achieving the purpose and need listed above. The 
alternatives will explore different outcomes to be addressed during 
this planning effort to understand the trade-offs of different land 
management approaches. The BLM welcomes comments on all preliminary

[[Page 45798]]

alternatives as well as suggestions for additional alternatives.

Planning Criteria

    The planning criteria guide the planning effort and lay the 
groundwork for effects analysis by identifying the preliminary issues 
and their analytical frameworks. Preliminary issues for the planning 
area have been identified by BLM personnel and from early engagement 
conducted for this planning effort with Federal, State, and local 
agencies; Tribes; and other stakeholders. The BLM has identified 
several preliminary issues for this planning effort's analysis and will 
provide them for public review as part of the planning criteria within 
the timeframe identified in DATES above. The planning criteria are 
available for public review and comment at the ePlanning website (see 
ADDRESSES).

Summary of Expected Impacts

    Consistent with protection of GSENM objects identified in 
Proclamation 10286, implementation of a new RMP may impact, either 
beneficially or adversely, resources and uses within GSENM, including 
recreation, livestock grazing, soils, water, vegetation, cultural and 
historic resources, paleontological resources, visual resources, 
designated areas, social and economic values, and other human and 
environmental resources. Planning decisions related to livestock 
grazing will also consider portions of Glen Canyon National Recreation 
Area because portions of livestock grazing allotments administered by 
the BLM cross these administrative boundaries.

Schedule for the Decision-Making Process

    The BLM will provide additional opportunities for public 
participation consistent with NEPA and land use planning processes, 
including a 90-day comment period on the Draft RMP/EIS and a concurrent 
30-day public protest period and a 60-day Governor's consistency review 
on the Proposed RMP. The Draft RMP/EIS is anticipated to be available 
for public review in the spring of 2023, and the Proposed RMP/Final EIS 
is anticipated to be available for public protest of the Proposed RMP 
in late 2023 with an Approved RMP and Record of Decision in spring 
2024.

Public Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping period and public 
review of the planning criteria, which guide the development and 
analysis of the Draft RMP/EIS.
    The BLM will be holding a total of five scoping meetings. Two 
scoping meetings will be held virtually. Three scoping meetings will be 
conducted in-person: one in Kanab, one in Escalante, and a third 
meeting held at a yet-to-be-determined location. Details of all 
meetings will be announced once known. In compliance with Department of 
the Interior public health guidelines, the BLM may need to hold public 
meetings in a virtual format if county-level transmission of COVID-19 
is ``high'' at the time of the public meetings. In that case, the BLM 
will hold five virtual public meetings.
    The specific dates and locations of these scoping meetings will be 
announced at least 15 days in advance through local media, social 
media, and the ePlanning website (see ADDRESSES).
    The ePlanning website (see ADDRESSES) also includes, or will 
include background information on GSENM, a planning process overview, 
preliminary planning criteria and interim management guidance. You may 
submit comments on issues, potential alternatives, relevant information 
and analyses, and the preliminary planning criteria in writing to the 
BLM at any public scoping meeting or to the BLM using one of the 
methods listed in the ADDRESSES section.

ACECs

    There are currently no designated ACECs within GSENM because the 
BLM determined under the previous planning efforts that the management 
provided through those RMPs were sufficient without warranting the 
designation of ACECs. No areas were identified during preplanning and 
early engagement for consideration as ACECs.
    This notice invites the public to nominate areas for ACEC 
consideration. To assist the BLM in evaluating nominations for 
consideration in the Draft RMP/EIS, please provide supporting 
descriptive materials, maps, and evidence of the relevance and 
importance of resources or hazards by the close of the public scoping 
period to facilitate timely evaluation (see DATES and ADDRESSES). The 
BLM has identified the anticipated issues related to the consideration 
of ACECs in the planning criteria.

Cooperating Agencies

    Federal, State, and local agencies, along with Tribal Nations may 
request or be asked by the BLM to participate as a cooperating agency. 
At this time the BLM has identified the following potential cooperating 
agencies:

 National Park Service
 United States Fish and Wildlife Service
 USDA Forest Service
 Utah's Public Lands Policy Coordinating Office
 State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands 
Administration
 Utah State Historic Preservation Office
 Kane County, Utah
 Garfield County, Utah
 Washington County Water Conservancy District
 Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

 Navajo Nation
 Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah
 Pueblo of Acoma
 Pueblo of San Felipe
 Pueblo of Tesuque
 Pueblo of Zuni
 San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe of Arizona
 Hopi Tribe
 Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation

Responsible Official

    The Utah State Director is the deciding official for this planning 
effort.

Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The nature of the decision to be made will be the State Director's 
selection of land use planning decisions for managing BLM-administered 
lands under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield in a 
manner that best addresses the purpose and need.

Interdisciplinary Team

    The BLM will use an interdisciplinary approach to develop the plan 
in order to consider the variety of resource issues and concerns 
identified. Specialists with expertise in the following disciplines 
will be involved in this planning effort: cultural resources, Native 
American concerns, paleontology, minerals, lands/access, recreation, 
special designations, wildlife, livestock grazing, soils, water 
resources, vegetation, rangeland management, fisheries, fire 
management, woodlands/forestry, socioeconomics, environmental justice, 
visual resources, night sky, soundscapes, air quality, and climate 
change.

Additional Information

    The BLM will identify, analyze, and consider mitigation to address 
the reasonably foreseeable impacts to resources from the proposed plan 
and all analyzed alternatives and, in accordance with 40 CFR 
1502.14(f), include appropriate mitigation measures not already 
included in the proposed plan or alternatives. Mitigation may

[[Page 45799]]

include avoidance, minimization, rectification, reduction or 
elimination over time, and compensation; it may be considered at 
multiple scales, including the landscape scale.
    The BLM will utilize and coordinate the NEPA and land use planning 
processes for this planning effort to help support compliance with 
applicable procedural requirements under the Endangered Species Act (16 
U.S.C. 1536) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 
(54 U.S.C. 306108) as provided in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3), including the 
public involvement requirements of Section 106. The information about 
historic and cultural resources and threatened and endangered species 
within the area potentially affected by the proposed plan will assist 
the BLM in identifying and evaluating impacts to such resources.
    The BLM will consult with Indian Tribal Nations on a government-to-
government basis in accordance with Executive Order 13175, BLM MS 1780, 
and other Departmental policies. Tribal concerns, including impacts on 
Indian trust assets and potential impacts on cultural resources, will 
be given due consideration. Federal, State, and local agencies, along 
with Indian Tribal Nations and other stakeholders that may be 
interested in or affected by the proposed GSENM RMP that the BLM is 
evaluating, are invited to participate in the scoping process and, if 
eligible, may request or be requested by the BLM to participate in the 
development of the environmental analysis as a cooperating agency. The 
BLM intends to hold a series of government-to-government consultation 
meetings. The BLM will send invitations to potentially affected Tribal 
Nations prior to the meetings. The BLM will provide additional 
opportunities for government-to-government consultation during the NEPA 
process.
    Before including your address, phone number, email address, or 
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be 
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying 
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can 
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying 
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be 
able to do so.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.9 and 43 CFR 1610.2)

Gregory Sheehan,
State Director.
[FR Doc. 2022-16296 Filed 7-28-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-25-P