• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
4733
Federal Register
/Vol. 67, No. 21/Thursday, January 31, 2002/Notices
FEIS; the decision rationale;identification of the environmentallypreferable alternative; a description of mitigation measures; and a discussion of impairment.The U.S. Department of the Interiorowns the land under the airport. Twotwenty-year Special Use Permits have been issued and/or updated to the Townof Provincetown, as of 6/01/98 and 6/19/98, to operate a municipal airportwithin a prescribed permit area boundary indicated in the NPS permit(s)for aviation operations. One covers therunway area and operational facilitiesand the other relates to navigationallighting and instrumentation facilities.Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (recodifiedat 49 U.S.C. 303) requires
‘‘
that theSecretary shall not approve any programor project which requires the use of anypublic park, recreation area, or wildlifeand waterfowl refuge of national, state,or local significance as determined bythe officials having jurisdiction thereof unless there is no feasible and prudentalternative to the use of such land andsuch program or project includes allpossible planning to minimize harmresulting from the use.
’’
The pendingissuance of permits covered by this RODfor safety improvements necessitated animpact analysis of 4(f) land, as parkland beyond that currently permitted for thevarious airport purposes was requested by FAA. A Statement of Findings onwetland protection was also prepared toaddress wetland and floodplainimpacts.The FEIS for the ProvincetownMunicipal Airport was prepared by theFAA to cover their actions related toimplementing the airport Master Plan.The NPS cooperated in the developmentof the FEIS by providing technical inputand review/commentary on impactanalysis. The Airport Master Plan is basic to FAA
’
s procedures to develop anAirport Layout Plan that guides physicalairport development and improvementsuch as alterations to runway safetyareas, the apron area, and replacementof an approach light system.A runway extension was evaluated inthe FEIS on the basis of currentdevelopment interests and currentlyfeasible alternative considerations;however, funding for the project is not being approved at this time and furtherevaluation of this action will be pursuedaccording to conditions outlined in aGeneral Agreement prepared by theFAA and NPS, the essential text of which is presented in the FEIS. Theinclusion of the runway extension in theFEIS and the Airport Layout Plan wasfor planning consideration only.Basically, the agreement between NPSand FAA states that when the FAAdetects a need to further considerrunway extension, the FAA will fullydocument the need and initiate re-evaluation of the several factors thataffect the Federal decision makingprocess for identifying and selecting therunway extension alternatives and theadequacy of the FAA ROD, by way of anEnvironmental Assessment (EA).Section 4(f) and Executive Order 11990compliance for runway extension will be duly accomplished at that time. NPSdecision-making on the runwayextension is also deferred to that time.
Decision (Selected Action)
The National Park Service will adjustthe parkland area permitted for airportuse based only on the proposed actionsrelated to the Runway Safety Area,parking aprons, and lighting system asdescribed for safety improvements inthe FEIS for the ProvincetownMunicipal Airport issued in April 2000and the FAA
’
s ROD, signed November21, 2000. This will involve exchangeand re-designation of the airport landuse footprint, by returning two acres of previously permitted land, back toparkland use, and permitting 0.96 acres(incorrectly described in the FAA FEISand FAA ROD as 0.69 acres) of parklands needed to serve navigationallocalizer relocation and its associatedcritical area use. The two acres of previously permitted parklands are being relinquished by FAA to revert toparkland uses, in compensation for thenew acreage provided for the localizer.These two acres are located in asurficially undisturbed dune area whichpossess greater ecological value than theportion of land being exchanged,located between the eastern end of therunway and Race Point Road.
Dated: November 28, 2001.
Marie Rust,
Northeast Regional Director, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 02
–
2286 Filed 1
–
30
–
02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310
 –
76
 –
P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORNational Park ServiceNotice of Intent; Fire ManagementPlan, Environmental Impact Statement,Chiricahua National Monument,Arizona
AGENCY
:
National Park Service,Department of the Interior.
ACTION
:
Notice of intent to prepare anenvironmental impact statement for theFire Management Plan for ChiricahuaNational Monument.
SUMMARY
:
Under the provisions of theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the National Park Service ispreparing an environmental impactstatement for the Fire Management Planfor Chiricahua National Monument.This effort will result in a new wildlandfire management plan that meets currentpolicies, provides a framework formaking fire-related decisions, andserves as an operational manual.Development of a new fire plan iscompatible with the broader goals andobjectives derived from the parkpurpose that governs resourcesmanagement. Alternatives are based oninternal scoping done by National ParkService staff on October 17 and 18,2001. Besides the No-action alternative,preliminary alternatives include theproposed Corridor Plan alternative andLandscape Plan alternative. The No-action alternative maintains the current1992 fire management plan strategy of suppression, prescribed natural fire, andprescribed burning. The proposedalternative Corridor Plan alternativewould allow natural fires andprescribed fires that meet managementobjectives except in the narrow corridorof developments. This area of the parkwould be subject to suppression andselective prescribed burning andmechanical thinning to reduce fuelhazards. The Landscape Plan alternativewould call for the National Park Serviceand adjacent US Forest Service tojointly formulate a fire managementplan that covers the entire landscape of the Chiricahua Mountains or a morenaturally-bound portion of the range.Major issues are environmental effectsof the FMP that are potential problemsand include reduction of plant andwildlife populations, disturbance of unique sites, increased erosion or debrisflow, increased air pollution, hazards tolife and property, visitor inconvenience,reduced tourism, and damage to culturalresourcesA scoping brochure has been prepareddescribing the issues identified to date.Copies of the brochures may be obtainedfrom Superintendent, ChiricahuaNational Monument, 13063 E. BonitaCanyon Road, Willcox, AZ 85643
–
9737.The scoping period will be 30 days fromthe date this notice is published in the
Federal Register
.
Comments
If you wish to comment on thescoping brochure, you may submit yourcomments by any one of severalmethods. You may mail comments toSuperintendent, Chiricahua National
VerDate 11<MAY>200012:22 Jan 30, 2002Jkt 197001PO 00000Frm 00036Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\31JAN1.SGMpfrm07PsN: 31JAN1
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...