[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 13, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74929-74931]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-21261]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Notice of Availability of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation
Plan and Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Reach National
Monument and Notification of Public Meetings
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability and notification of public meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces that the
Draft Hanford Reach National Monument (Monument) Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (Draft CCP/EIS) is
available for review and comment. The Draft CCP/EIS describes the
Service's proposal for managing the Monument for the next 15 years.
Proposed changes to Monument management include: Opening additional
acres to public use; implementing an upland and riparian habitat
management program; developing and implementing cultural resource
monitoring and management plans; establishing partnerships and
community outreach programs to refine management of natural, cultural
and recreational resources; establishing an environmental education
program; and expanding interpretive, wildlife viewing, and wildlife
photography facilities and programs. Draft compatibility determinations
for several different public uses are also available for review with
the Draft CCP/EIS.
DATES: Written comments must be received at the address below by
[[Page 74930]]
February 23, 2007. Public meetings will be held in January and February
of 2007, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for more information.
ADDRESSES: Comments on the Draft CCP/EIS should be addressed to: Greg
Hughes, Project Leader, Hanford Reach National Monument, 3250 Port of
Benton Boulevard, Richland, Washington 99354. Comments may also be
submitted: at the public meetings; via electronic mail to
[email protected]; or via the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/hanfordreach/. Please use ``Hanford Reach CCP'' in the subject line for
all electronic correspondence. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
information on how to view or obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EIS and
for the dates, times, and locations of the public meetings.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Hughes, Project Leader, phone (509)
371-1801.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Draft CCP/EIS was prepared pursuant to
the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, as amended, and
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Copies of the
Draft CCP/EIS, on compact disk, may be obtained by contacting Greg
Hughes, Hanford Reach National Monument, 3250 Port of Benton Boulevard,
Richland, Washington 99354, telephone (509) 371-1801. The Draft CCP/EIS
may be downloaded from hanfordreach.fws.gov/planning.html. Copies of
the Draft CCP/EIS may be viewed at Hanford Reach National Monument (see
ADDRESSES) and at the following libraries and reading rooms.
1. Department of Energy Reading Room, Washington State University
Tri-Cites Campus Library and Hanford Technical Library, Consolidated
Information Center, 2770 University Drive, Richland, WA.
2. Mid-Columbia Public Library, Benton City Branch, 708 9th Street,
Benton City, WA.
3. Kennewick Public Library, 1620 South Union, Kennewick, WA.
4. Mattawa Community Library, 61 Government Way, Mattawa, WA.
5. Othello Public Library, 101 East Main Street, Othello, WA.
6. Pasco Public Library, 1320 West Hopkins Street, Pasco, WA.
7. Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate Drive, Richland, WA.
Public Meetings
Four public meetings will be held to obtain public comments on the
Draft CCP/EIS. The dates, times, and locations of the public meetings
follow.
1. January 30, 2007, 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., at Mattawa Elementary School
Gym, 400 North Boundary Road, Mattawa, WA.
2. January 31, 2007, 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., at Sunnyside Community
Center, 1521 South 1st Street, Sunnyside, WA.
3. February 5, 2007, 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., at the Hampton Inn, 486
Bradley Blvd., Richland, WA.
4. February 8, 2007, 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., at the Red Lion Hotel, 2525
North 20th Ave., Pasco, WA.
Background
The 195,777-acre Monument is located in south-central Washington
near Kennewick, Pasco, and Richland (Tri-Cities), Washington. Monument
lands lie on both sides of the Columbia River. The land comprising the
Monument has an unusual and colorful provenance. The entry of the
United States into World War II, and the race to develop an atomic
bomb, led to the search for a suitable place to locate plutonium
production and purification facilities. In 1943, the War Department
went in search of a remote, easily defensible, and geologically stable
site, with plenty of cool water, abundant energy (from hydropower dams
on the Columbia River), and a moderate climate, on which to build
plutonium production reactors. The area around the isolated desert
towns of White Bluffs and Hanford was an ideal location.
For more than 40 years, the primary mission at the Hanford Site was
the production of nuclear materials for national defense. However, only
a relatively small central core of the entire Hanford Site was needed
for plutonium production; large tracts of land around this core were
used as protective buffer zones for safety and security purposes and
remained undisturbed. These buffer zones preserved a nationally
significant biological and cultural resource setting in the Columbia
Basin region.
In the early 1970s, the need for large buffer zones around the
Hanford central core declined, and the Department of Energy (DOE), now
running the Hanford Site, began transferring the management of portions
of the buffer zones to the Service and the Washington State Department
of Fish and Wildlife, culminating with the 1997 transfer of the
administration of the Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology Reserve to
the Service.
In the 1980s, concerns for protection of the Hanford Site's natural
and cultural resource values grew, as did interest in consolidating
management under one natural resource agency. In 1988, Congress
directed the Department of the Interior (DOI) to conduct a study of
excess lands within the Hanford Site, with the intent to provide
recommendations to Congress on the manner to best protect natural and
cultural resource values. The resulting report by the National Park
Service--the Hanford Reach of the Columbia River Comprehensive River
Conservation Study--and DOE's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, identified
the Service as best suited to protect those values, and the lands
necessary to support them. After years of discussion and controversy,
the question of protection was settled when President Clinton created
the Monument in June 2000 (Proclamation 7319) under the American
Antiquities Act.
Within the Hanford Site, the Monument forms a large horseshoe-
shaped area around what is generally known as Central Hanford. The
Monument, and Central Hanford, have been protected since 1943, and
together, provide a haven for native plants, animals, and biological
communities that were once more common in the surrounding landscape.
Equally important is the portion of the Columbia River within the
Hanford Site. It is unique within the post-dam Columbia River system in
the United States, because the river is essentially free flowing
through a segment of approximately 51 miles (46.5 miles are within the
Monument). This segment, called the Hanford Reach, contains riparian
habitat that is otherwise rare within the Columbia River system. It is
because of this juxtaposition of increasingly rare habitats--the only
nontidal, free-flowing stretch of the Columbia River remaining in the
United States, and the largest remnant of the shrub-steppe ecosystem
that dominated the Columbia Basin prior to European settlement--that
the Monument was established.
Purpose and Need for Action
The purpose of the CCP is to provide a coherent, integrated set of
management actions to help attain the Monument's vision, goals, and
objectives. The CCP identifies the role the Monument should play in
support of the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS),
explains the Service's management actions, and provides a basis for
Monument funding requests.
Alternatives
The Draft CCP/EIS identifies and evaluates six alternatives for
managing the Monument for the next 15 years. All alternatives, except
the No Action Alternative, open more acres of the Monument to public
access, with Alternative B opening the least amount
[[Page 74931]]
of acreage and Alternatives D and E opening the most. All alternatives
meet the primary purposes of the Monument and the mission of the NWRS;
therefore, each one has the potential to be selected for
implementation. The draft Alternative E has been identified as the
preferred alternative because it strikes a reasonable balance between
resource protections and compatible, wildlife-dependent public use and
access, while at the same time addressing relevant laws, policies,
regulations, and other mandates, and locally identified significant
issues.
Alternative A, the No Action Alternative, is required by NEPA. It
provides a baseline from which to compare the other alternatives. Under
Alternative A, management practices already underway or funded would
continue. Management would focus on protecting and enhancing biological
and cultural resources, fire protection, fire rehabilitation, and
maintenance of existing facilities. Land use designations that were in
place at the time of Monument establishment would be maintained. Access
for recreational, interpretive, and educational purposes would continue
year-round in designated areas. The current primitive recreation
opportunities would continue to be provided. The small environmental
education program would continue, but could fluctuate without a stable
staff base.
Alternative B focuses on protecting, conserving, and restoring the
resources described in the Monument Proclamation; thousands of acres of
the Monument could see some level of restoration activity on an annual
basis. Avoiding impacts to resources would be a priority. Access for
recreational, interpretive, and educational purposes would be expanded
over current levels and would continue year-round in designated areas.
The current primitive recreation opportunities would continue, with
some additional facilities provided. New facilities could include
wildlife observation sites and the construction of new trails. The
small environmental education program would be slightly expanded.
Alternative C focuses on protecting and conserving the natural
resources of the Monument by concentrating public use away from the
Monument's interior to create and maintain large areas that are free of
development, both for conservation purposes and to maintain natural
landscapes and solitude opportunities. Visitors would be allowed access
to significant portions of the Monument, but access points would be
limited and concentrated in specific areas. Both primitive and
developed recreation opportunities would be provided, although ease of
access would be constrained. New facilities could include camping sites
for float boaters, improved boat launches, wildlife observation sites,
and the construction of new trails in greater abundance than
Alternative B. Educational and interpretive opportunities would be
substantially enhanced over current levels. Through economies of scale,
and limiting large-scale development, more resources would be available
for habitat restoration activities than under any alternative except
Alternative B.
Alternative D provides the highest level of public use and access,
although protection of resources would still remain a priority.
Alternative D would assume a greater acceptance of risk to natural and
cultural resources through increased public use and access. Developed
recreation opportunities and visitor facilities would be increased
significantly from the current level, including the construction of
campgrounds, boat launches, new access points, trails, and automobile
tour routes. Educational and interpretive opportunities would be
greatly expanded over current levels, and would be aimed at not just
providing information about the Monument, but also protecting Monument
resources. This increase in public amenities would likely mean a
decrease in restoration activities, with a greater emphasis on
protecting resources and habitats in their current conditions.
Alternative E, the Preferred Alternative, was developed by the
Hanford Reach Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) based on the initial
range of actions under Alternatives A, B, C, and D. The FAC selected
elements from each of the other alternatives to develop this
alternative. Access points would be concentrated, much the same as
Alternative C, although development most closely matches that of
Alternative D. Recreation opportunities and visitor facilities would be
increased substantially from the current level, although not to the
level of Alternative D. New amenities would include the construction of
camp sites for float boaters, boat launches, trails, and new access
points. Educational and interpretive opportunities would be greatly
expanded over current levels, although not to the level of Alternative
D. This increase in public amenities would also likely mean a decrease
in restoration activities, with a greater emphasis on protecting
resources and habitats in the condition they currently exist.
Alternative F was developed by the Confederated Tribes of the
Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) by modifying Alternative B.
Restoration, access, public use and other management actions closely
resemble Alternative B. The primary difference between Alternatives B
and F is that Alternative F controls and monitors all public use and
access through a permit system for all open areas of the Monument. Some
areas would also require user fees to help fund Monument programs.
Public Comments
Public comments are requested, considered, and incorporated
throughout the planning process. After the review and comment period
ends for this Draft CCP/EIS, comments will be analyzed by the Service
and addressed in revised planning documents. All comments received from
individuals, including names and addresses, become part of the official
public record and may be released. Requests for release of comments
received from the public will be handled in accordance with the Freedom
of Information Act, NEPA, and Service and DOI policies and procedures.
Dated: December 7, 2006.
David J. Wesley,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, Oregon.
[FR Doc. E6-21261 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P