[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48682-48684]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-12463]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[BLM_OR_FRN_MO4500179562]


Notice of Availability of the Draft Resource Management Plan 
Amendment and Environmental Impact Statement for the Lakeview Field 
Office, Lakeview District, Oregon

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969, as amended (NEPA), and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act 
of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has 
prepared a Draft Resource Management Plan (RMP) Amendment and Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Lakeview RMP and by this 
notice is providing information announcing the opening of the comment 
period on the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS.

DATES: This notice announces the opening of a 90-day comment period for 
the Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS beginning with the date following 
the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) publication of its Notice 
of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register.
    To afford the BLM the opportunity to consider comments in the 
forthcoming Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS, please ensure the BLM 
receives your comments prior to the close of the 90-day comment period 
or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever is later.

ADDRESSES: The Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS is available for 
review on the BLM ePlanning project website at https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510.
    Written comments related to the Lakeview Draft RMP Amendment and 
Draft EIS may be submitted by any of the following methods:
     website: https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510.
     Email: [email protected].
     Mail: Lakeview District, BLM, 1301 South G Street, 
Lakeview, OR 97630.

[[Page 48683]]

    Documents pertinent to this proposal may be examined online at 
https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510 and at the 
Lakeview District Office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Collins, Planning and 
Environmental Coordinator, 541-947-2177; 1301 South G Street, Lakeview, 
OR 97630; [email protected]. 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. Collins. 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 
Oregon/Washington State Director has prepared a Draft RMP Amendment and 
Draft EIS. The Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS analyzes alternatives 
that would change the existing 2003 Lakeview RMP and Record of Decision 
(ROD), as amended by the 2015 Oregon Greater Sage-Grouse Approved RMP 
Amendment and ROD.
    The planning area is located in Lake and Harney counties, Oregon, 
and encompasses approximately 3.2 million acres of public land.

Purpose and Need

    The purpose and need for this Draft RMP Amendment and Draft EIS is 
to comply with the provisions of a 2010 settlement agreement, which 
required the BLM to prepare an RMP Amendment that addresses a range of 
alternatives for managing lands with wilderness characteristics, off 
highway vehicle (OHV) use, and livestock grazing use within the 
Lakeview planning area. The BLM has determined that 106 inventory units 
contain wilderness characteristics (approximately 1,654,103 acres).

Alternatives Including the Preferred Alternative

    The BLM has analyzed six alternatives in detail, including the No 
Action Alternative. The No Action Alternative represents the 
continuation of existing management direction under the 2003 Lakeview 
RMP/ROD (as amended), including the existing goals and management 
direction for OHV and livestock grazing use. In addition, the interim 
management provisions outlined in the 2010 Settlement Agreement would 
continue to prevent management actions in an inventory unit determined 
by the BLM to possess wilderness characteristics that would be deemed 
by the BLM to diminish the size or cause the entire BLM inventory unit 
to no longer meet the criteria for wilderness characteristics.
    Alternative A would continue the BLM's management direction under 
the 2003 Lakeview RMP/ROD (as amended), including the existing goals 
and management direction for OHV and livestock grazing use. Management 
would emphasize resources and multiple uses other than wilderness 
characteristics. None of the 106 units that the BLM found to possess 
wilderness characteristics would receive additional protections.
    Alternative B would emphasize the protection of wilderness 
characteristics within all 106 units. Under Alternative B, 34 units and 
portions of 2 units (approximately 273,680 acres) would be designated 
as Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs) under section 202 of FLPMA. These 
proposed WSAs would be managed as visual resource management class I, 
land tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), exclusion zones 
for all rights-of-way, and would include restrictions on minerals. The 
remaining 77 units and portions of 2 units (approximately 1,381,610 
acres) would be managed as visual resource management class II, land 
tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for 
major rights-of-way, and include some restrictions on minerals. OHV use 
would be closed in all 106 units that the BLM has found to possess 
wilderness characteristics (approximately 1,654,103 acres) and in all 
WSAs. Cross-country motorized travel and motorized travel on existing 
internal primitive routes in these areas would be prohibited.
    Under Alternative B, grazing allocations would not be changed. 
However, where existing livestock grazing is found to be a significant 
causal factor for non-attainment of rangeland health standards, the BLM 
would remove grazing, either at the allotment or pasture scale, for the 
duration of the plan amendment. Should the BLM receive a voluntary 
permit relinquishment for any lands with wilderness characteristics, 
WSAs, Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, Research Natural Areas, 
or designated critical habitat for Federally listed species, the BLM 
would remove or reduce grazing in the area for the life of the plan 
amendment.
    Alternatives C, D, and E would establish new management goals and 
additional protective management for wilderness characteristics. The 
units emphasized for protection of wilderness characteristics would be 
managed as visual resource management class II, land tenure zone 1 
(retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for major rights-of-
way, and include restrictions on minerals. The specific units 
emphasized for protection of wilderness characteristics would vary 
across these alternatives. In addition, a 100 to 300-foot setback would 
be applied along boundary roads of these units under Alternatives C, D, 
and E, to provide the BLM with additional management flexibility to 
address other resources needs, threats, and multiple uses adjacent to 
these areas.
    Alternative C would emphasize the protection of wilderness 
characteristics in 26 units and portions of 4 units (approximately 
411,033 acres) that the BLM found to possess wilderness 
characteristics. The BLM would balance the management of wilderness 
characteristics with other resources and multiple uses in 71 units and 
portions of 2 units (approximately 1,161,199 acres) and would emphasize 
the management of other resources and multiple uses over wilderness 
characteristics in 5 units and portions of 3 units (approximately 
74,529 acres).
    Under Alternative C, OHV use throughout the entire planning area 
would be limited to existing routes, unless currently limited to 
designated routes or closed to OHV use. Grazing allocations would not 
be changed. However, the BLM would temporarily remove grazing, at 
either the allotment or pasture scale, when existing livestock grazing 
is found to be a significant causal factor for non-attainment of 
rangeland health standards, until such time as monitoring or a 
subsequent assessment indicates that the pasture or allotment is 
meeting standards or is making significant progress towards meeting 
standards. Should the BLM receive a voluntary permit relinquishment for 
public lands in a WSA, it would remove or reduce grazing in the area 
for the life of the plan amendment.
    Alternative D would emphasize the protection of wilderness 
characteristics within two units (approximately 4,671 acres) that the 
BLM found to possess wilderness characteristics. OHV use in these 2 
units would be limited to existing routes. Management of wilderness 
characteristics would be balanced with other resources and multiple 
uses in 41 units and portions of 18 units (approximately 1,075,323 
acres). The BLM would emphasize the management of other resources and 
multiple uses over wilderness characteristics in 46 units 
(approximately 583,332 acres).

[[Page 48684]]

    Under Alternative D, the area open to cross-country OHV use would 
be reduced to about 70,573 acres of expressly defined areas. Most of 
the livestock grazing management would be the same as the No Action 
Alternative. However, if a rangeland health assessment and evaluation 
indicates one or more standards are not met in an allotment or pasture 
due to factors that are subject to BLM control, then the authorized 
officer shall consider taking action to make progress toward rangeland 
health standards and land use plan objectives, even if livestock 
grazing is not determined to be a significant causal factor for non-
attainment of standard(s). Actions available to the authorized officer 
could include, but are not limited to, changes in livestock grazing 
management.
    Alternative E was developed with input from individual members of 
the Southeastern Oregon Resource Advisory Council and would emphasize 
the protection of wilderness characteristics within 26 units 
(approximately 372,218 acres) that the BLM found to possess wilderness 
characteristics. Management of wilderness characteristics would be 
balanced with other resources and multiple uses in 68 units 
(approximately 1,109,160 acres). Management would emphasize other 
resources and multiple uses over wilderness characteristics in 12 units 
(approximately 168,512 acres). OHV and livestock grazing management 
throughout the planning area would be the same as the No Action 
Alternative.
    The BLM further considered seven additional alternatives but chose 
not to analyze them in detail as explained in the Draft RMP Amendment 
and Draft EIS.
    The BLM Oregon/Washington State Director has identified Alternative 
C as the preferred alternative. Alternative C was found to best meet 
the State Director's planning guidance and, therefore, selected as the 
preferred alternative because it emphasizes a high level of resource 
protection in portions of the planning area while providing for a 
sustainable level of multiple uses in other portions of the planning 
area. This alternative balances the need to preserve or protect 
specific public lands in their natural condition with the need to 
provide food and habitat for fish, wildlife, and domestic animals, and 
provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use. Alternative 
C also recognizes the Nation's need for domestic sources of minerals, 
food, timber, and fiber from the public lands. This balance would be 
accomplished within the limits of the ecosystem's ability to provide 
these multiple uses on a sustainable basis and within the constraints 
of applicable laws, regulations, and policies, including sections 
102(7), 102(8), 102(12), 103(c), and 103(h) of FLPMA.

Schedule for the Decision-Making Process

    The BLM will be holding three public meetings on the Draft RMP 
Amendment and Draft EIS in the following locations: One in-person 
meeting in Lakeview, Oregon, and two virtual meetings. The specific 
date(s) and location(s) of these meetings will be announced at least 15 
days in advance through public notices, media releases, social media, 
and/or mailings.
    The BLM will continue to consult with Indian Tribal Nations on a 
government-to-government basis in accordance with Executive Order 
13175, BLM Manual 1780, and other Departmental policies. Tribal 
concerns, including impacts on Indian trust assets and potential 
impacts to cultural resources, will be given due consideration.
    While the BLM has identified Alternative C as the preferred 
alternative, this does not represent the final agency decision. For 
this reason, the BLM encourages reviewers to provide substantive 
comments on all alternatives. Substantive comments are those that raise 
issues or concerns that may need to be addressed, challenge the 
accuracy of information presented, or challenge the adequacy of the 
analysis, along with a supporting rationale. You may submit written 
comments to the BLM through any of the methods identified in the 
ADDRESSES section above. All comments must be received by the end of 
the comment period or 15 days after the last public meeting, whichever 
is later. Whenever possible, reviewers should include a reference to 
either the page or section in the document to which the comment 
applies. Following the comment period, the BLM will develop and publish 
the Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS which may reflect changes or 
adjustments based on the substantive comments received.
    Comments submitted must include the commenter's name and street 
address. 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.
    After the BLM publishes the Proposed RMP Amendment and Final EIS, 
it will provide additional opportunities for public participation 
consistent with the NEPA and land use planning processes, including a 
30-day public protest period and a 60-day Governor's consistency 
review.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2)

Barry R. Bushue,
State Director, Oregon/Washington.
[FR Doc. 2024-12463 Filed 6-6-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-24-P