19784 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Notices 

The DEIS is also available for public 

review on the following Web sites: 

• http:// 

www.anthonycasinofacts.com, and 

• http://www.jemezpueblo.org. 

If you would like to obtain a CD copy 

of the DEIS, please write or call Priscilla 

Wade, Regional Environmental 

Protection Specialist, Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, Division of Environmental, 

Safety, and Cultural Resources 

Management, Southwest Regional 

Office, 1001 Indian School Road, NW., 

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87104. 

Public Comment Availability: 

Comments, including names and 

addresses of respondents, will be 

available for public review at the BIA 

mailing address shown in the 

ADDRESSES section of this notice, during 

regular business hours, 8 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

holidays. Before including your address, 

telephone number, e-mail 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: This notice is published 

pursuant to Sec. 1503.1 of the Council of 

Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR 

part 1500 through 1508) and Sec. 46.305 of 

the Department of Interior Regulations (43 

CFR part 46), implementing the procedural 

requirements of the NEPA of 1969, as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.), and is in 

the exercise of authority delegated to the 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by 209 

DM 8. 

Dated: March 25, 2011. 

Jodi Gillette, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8035 Filed 4–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–W7–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[LLIDT01000. L51010000. FX0000. 

LVRWD09D0500] 

Notice of Availability of the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Draft Resource Management Plan 

Amendment to the 1987 Jarbidge 

Resource Management Plan for the 

Proposed China Mountain Wind 

Project 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) of 1969, as amended, and the 

Federal Land Policy and Management 

Act of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended, the 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has 

prepared a Draft Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) and a Draft Resource 

Management Plan (RMP) Amendment 

for the Proposed China Mountain Wind 

Project in south central Idaho and 

northeast Nevada and by this notice is 

announcing the opening of the comment 

period. 

DATES: To ensure that comments will be 

considered, the BLM must receive 

written comments on the Draft EIS and 

Draft RMP Amendment within 90 days 

following the date the Environmental 

Protection Agency publishes its notice 

of the availability of these documents in 

the Federal Register. The BLM will 

announce future meetings or hearings 

and any other public involvement 

activities at least 15 days in advance 

through public notices, media releases, 

and/or mailings. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

related to the Proposed China Mountain 

Wind Project by any of the following 

methods: 

• Web site: http://www.blm.gov/id/st/ 

en/prog/planning/china_mountain

_wind.html. 

• E-mail: id_chinamtn_eis@blm.gov. 

• Fax: (208) 735–2076. 

• Mail: China Mountain Wind Project 

Manager, Jarbidge Field Office, 2536 

Kimberly Road, Twin Falls, Idaho 

83301. 

Copies of the Proposed China 

Mountain Wind Project Draft EIS and 

Draft RMP Amendment are available in 

the Jarbidge Field Office at the above 

address or electronically on the Web site 

shown above. 

Copies of the Draft EIS and Draft RMP 

Amendment are available for public 

inspection during normal business 

hours at the following locations: 

• Bureau of Land Management, Idaho 

State Office, Public Room, 1387 South 

Vinnell Way, Boise, Idaho 83709; 

• Bureau of Land Management, 

Jarbidge Field Office, 2536 Kimberly 

Road, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301; 

• Bureau of Land Management, 

Nevada State Office, Public Room, 1340 

Financial Boulevard, Reno, Nevada 

89502; and 

• Bureau of Land Management, Wells 

Field Office, 3900 E. Idaho Street, Elko, 

Nevada 89801. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

China Mountain Wind Project Manager, 

Jarbidge Field Office, 2536 Kimberly 

Road, Twin Falls, Idaho 83301, 

telephone (208) 735–2072. 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, 7 days a week, to leave a message 

or question with the above individual. 

You will receive a reply during normal 

business hours. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: China 

Mountain Wind, LLC (CMW), which is 

owned by RES America Developments, 

Inc. (RES) and Nevada Power Company 

(NV Energy), is proposing to construct, 

operate, and maintain a commercial 

wind power electric generation facility 

capable of generating up to 425 

megawatts (MW) of electricity. Up to 

170 wind turbines, each having a 

generating capacity between 2.3 and 3.0 

MW, would be installed on an area 

covering approximately 30,700 acres in 

the Jarbidge Foothills, an area located 

southwest of Rogerson, Idaho, and west 

of Jackpot, Nevada. The proposed 

project area includes 4,700 acres of 

public land administered by the BLM 

Elko District, Wells Field Office, in 

northeastern Nevada, 15,300 acres of 

public land administered by the BLM 

Twin Falls District, Jarbidge Field 

Office, in south central Idaho, 2,000 

acres of State of Idaho lands, and 8,700 

acres of private lands in south central 

Idaho and northeast Nevada. 

The proposal involves the issuance of 

a BLM right-of-way (ROW) grant for the 

facilities located on public lands. 

CMW’s application for a ROW grant 

from the BLM for this project triggered 

the preparation of an EIS under NEPA. 

The BLM is responsible for evaluating 

the ROW grant across Federally 

managed lands by authority of FLPMA. 

The Draft EIS has been developed to 

meet the standards for analysis required 

for compliance with Federal regulations, 

and the Idaho State BLM has been 

designated as the review lead. Through 

internal and external scoping, the BLM 

has identified the following issues for 

analysis: Fish and wildlife including 

special status species, cultural 

resources, visual resources, air quality, 

soils, vegetation, noise, water quality, 

public access; recreation, wildfire 

management, hazardous materials, 

social values, and wilderness 

characteristics. A ROW grant for the 

proposed action is in conformance with 

the 1985 Wells RMP. It is not in 

conformance with the 1987 Jarbidge 

RMP provisions regarding Visual 

Resource Management (VRM) classes, 

protection of threatened, endangered, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 68 / Friday, April 8, 2011 / Notices 19785 

and sensitive species, protection of 

various wildlife and plant resources, 

and protection of water resources, 

wetland, and riparian habitats. 

Amendments to the 1987 Jarbidge 

RMP would be required if a decision is 

made to approve seven of the nine 

alternatives identified in the Draft EIS. 

Currently, the 1987 Jarbidge RMP is 

undergoing a separate revision process. 

A Draft Jarbidge RMP/EIS for that 

revision was made available to the 

public on September 3, 2010, for a 90- 

day comment period. On October 22, 

2010, the Idaho State Director extended 

the comment period for 60 days. The 

extended comment period closed 

January 31, 2011. If the Jarbidge RMP 

revision is adopted prior to a decision 

on the China Mountain Wind Project, 

the project proposal may need to be 

analyzed against the landscape-scale 

decisions made in that document. 

Nine alternatives are analyzed in this 

Draft EIS/Draft RMP Amendment. These 

alternatives were developed in response 

to issues and concerns raised during the 

NEPA scoping period that took place 

from April 21, 2008 to July 21, 2008 and 

involved three public meetings that took 

place in Twin Falls, Idaho, and Elko, 

and Jackpot, Nevada. Public and agency 

concerns include potential impacts to 

sensitive species and their habitats, 

cultural resources, visual resources, 

public access, and socio-economic 

resources. 

• Alternative A, the No Action 

Alternative, reflects existing RMP 

decisions and would result in denying 

the ROW application. 

• Alternative B1 is the applicant’s 

proposed action as submitted in its 

ROW application and associated plan of 

development. This alternative would 

require amendments to the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP: To change the VRM Class 

in certain parts of the proposed project 

area from II and III to IV; to remove 

stipulations, in the proposed project 

area only, regarding sensitive animal 

species and crucial habitats that specify 

seasonal occupancy restrictions for 

various sensitive species; to modify a 

stipulation that protects threatened, 

endangered, and sensitive plant species 

from disturbance related to construction 

activities such that it would no longer 

include sensitive plant species in the 

proposed project area; and to remove a 

stipulation, in the proposed project area 

only, that would preclude project 

facilities within 500 feet of streams. 

• Alternative B2 is a two-phase 

alternative with three different 

iterations of Phase I, B2a, B2b, and B2c, 

which are based on the applicant’s 

proposal and the avoidance of various 

wildlife habitats. A phased approach 

would allow the BLM to monitor the 

impacts of Phase I on wildlife prior to 

constructing the entire project. Phasing 

would allow the BLM to monitor and 

confirm that impacts are as predicted in 

the impact analysis. Under this 

alternative, monitoring results would be 

used to determine whether 

unanticipated impacts occurred as a 

result of Phase I. If unanticipated 

impacts occur, the BLM would conduct 

appropriate NEPA analysis and adjust 

requirements prior to issuing a notice to 

proceed to construct Phase II. 

Alternative B2a would require 

amendments to the 1987 Jarbidge RMP 

as described under Alternative B1 

above. Alternatives B2b and B2c would 

require amendments to the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP as described under 

Alternative B1 for VRM and sensitive 

plants. In addition, an amendment to 

the stipulations regarding sensitive 

animal species, crucial habitats, and 

water resources that would allow 

exemptions to the restrictions in the 

stipulations during construction, 

operation, and decommissioning of the 

proposed project on a case-by-case basis 

subject to certain conditions would be 

required. This amendment would also 

remove these same restrictions as they 

apply to routine daily maintenance 

only. 

• Alternative C is a modification of 

the applicant’s proposed action which 

seeks to reduce impacts to sage-grouse 

and bats by not constructing turbines in 

areas within 2 miles of sage-grouse leks 

and a high bat use area. This alternative 

would require amendments to the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP as described above for 

Alternatives B2b and B2c. 

• Alternative D is a modified version 

of Alternative C which seeks to further 

reduce impacts to sage-grouse by 

eliminating turbine construction in an 

area of known sage-grouse movements. 

This alternative would require 

amendments to the 1987 Jarbidge RMP 

as described above for Alternatives B2b 

and B2c. 

• Alternative E would be a 

modification of the applicant’s proposed 

action which would comply with all 

RMP decisions from the 1987 Jarbidge 

RMP and the 1985 Wells RMP by 

eliminating turbines from areas within 2 

miles of sage-grouse leks, eliminating 

turbines from areas of VRM Class II, 

precluding construction and 

maintenance activities during times 

seasonally restricted for various wildlife 

resources, and eliminating project 

facilities within 500 feet of streams. 

• Alternative F is a modification of 

the applicant’s proposed action which 

seeks to reduce impacts to cultural 

resources by eliminating turbine 

placement in areas with high 

concentrations of cultural resources and 

areas of known Native American 

religious significance. This alternative 

would require amendments to the 1987 

Jarbidge RMP as described above for 

alternatives B2b and B2c. 

In addition, 11 alternatives were 

considered in the Draft EIS but 

eliminated from detailed study. These 

alternatives did not meet the purpose 

and need of the proposed action. The 

BLM has not identified a preferred 

alternative for the project as one does 

not exist. A preferred project alternative 

will be identified in the Final EIS per 

Council on Environmental Quality 

requirements. The BLM has identified 

Alternatives B2b, B2c, C, D, and F, 

which would require amendments to 

the 1987 Jarbidge RMP, as the preferred 

planning alternatives, as required by 43 

CFR 1610.4–7. 

The BLM will use and coordinate the 

NEPA commenting process to satisfy the 

public involvement process for Section 

106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470(f) as 

provided for in 36 CFR 800.2(d)(3)). 

Native American Tribal consultations 

will be conducted in accordance with 

policy, and Tribal concerns will be 

given due consideration, including 

impacts on Indian trust assets. 

Following the public comment 

period, comments will be used to 

prepare the Proposed RMP Amendment 

and Final EIS. The BLM will respond to 

each substantive comment by making 

appropriate revisions to the document 

or by explaining why a comment did 

not warrant a change. A Notice of 

Availability of the Proposed RMP Plan 

Amendment/Final EIS will be published 

in the Federal Register. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail 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 1506.6, 1506.10 and 43 

CFR 1610.2. 

Richard VanderVoet, 

Jarbidge Field Office Manager. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8327 Filed 4–7–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES