41928 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Spokane Tribe’s 2719(b)(1)(A) 

Application and for the Proposed West 

Plains Mixed-Use Development 

Project, Spokane County, WA 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: This notice advises the public 

that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 

as Lead Agency, in cooperation with the 

Spokane Tribe of Indians (Tribe), 

intends to prepare an environmental 

impact statement (EIS) for a proposed 

mixed-use development and 

corresponding master plan for a 145- 

acre parcel of trust land adjacent to the 

City of Airway Heights, Spokane 

County, Washington. The project site 

may include, but is not limited to, a 

variety of proposed land uses such as a 

casino resort and hotel; commercial 

retail uses; offices; medical facilities; 

recreational, cultural, and entertainment 

facilities; and related parking. The 

purpose of the proposed action is to 

improve the economy of the Tribe and 

help their members attain economic self 

sufficiency. This notice also announces 

a public scoping meeting to identify 

potential issues and content for 

inclusion in the EIS. 

DATES: Written comments on the scope 

of the EIS or implementation of the 

proposed action should be received by 

October 10, 2009. The public scoping 

meeting will be held on Wednesday, 

August 26, 2009, from 5 p.m. to 7:30 

p.m. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail, hand carry, 

or telefax written comments to Dr. B.J. 

Howerton, Environmental Protection 

Specialist, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Northwest Regional Office, 911 NE 11th 

Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232–4169; 

telefax number (503) 231–2275. 

Comments may also be submitted 

electronically at the project Web site, 

http://www.westplainseis.com. Please 

see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

directions on submitting comments. The 

public scoping meeting will be held at 

the Sunset Elementary School 

Gymnasium, 12824 West 12th Avenue, 

Airway Heights, Washington 99001. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

B.J. Howerton, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

(503) 231–6749. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EIS 

will assess the environmental 

consequences of BIA approval of a 

proposed master plan for the 

development of a mixed-use 

development—which may include a 

casino resort and hotel; commercial 

retail uses; offices; medical facilities; 

recreational, cultural, and entertainment 

facilities; and related parking—on an 

approximately 145-acre parcel of trust 

land adjacent to the western city limits 

of Airway Heights, Spokane County, 

Washington. The project site is near the 

northwest corner of U.S. Highway 2 

(US–2) and Craig Road, and 

approximately 10 miles west of 

Spokane, Washington. It is located in 

the southwest quarter of 22–25–41, 

excluding US–2, and the north half of 

the southeast quarter, excluding the east 

830 feet of the south 491.5 feet of 22– 

25–41, excluding roads. 

The ‘‘Intergovernmental Agreement 

Between the Spokane Tribe of Indians 

and the City of Airway Heights’’ and the 

‘‘Memorandum of Agreement Between 

the City of Airway Heights and the 

Spokane Tribe of Indians Regarding 

Services and Impacts of Tribal Gaming 

on Indian Lands Located Adjacent to the 

City of Airway Heights (April 10, 2007)’’ 

provide details concerning shared 

responsibilities related to law 

enforcement and security services, 

public health and safety, road 

maintenance and repair, and other 

matters between the Tribe and the City. 

The project site would also include 

internal access roads, parking areas, and 

associated landscaping. Conceptual 

traffic analyses suggest possible 

roadway and intersection improvements 

along Craig Road and US–2 adjacent to 

the proposed project site. 

Significant issues to be covered 

during the scoping process may include, 

but are not limited to, air quality, 

transportation, surface and groundwater 

resources, biological resources, cultural 

resources, socioeconomic conditions, 

public services, infrastructure, land use, 

aesthetics, and environmental justice. 

Directions for Submitting Public 

Comments 

If you choose to submit your 

comments to the BIA directly, your 

comments must be in writing and must 

be submitted in person or by mail. 

Please include your name, return 

address, and the caption, ‘‘DEIS Scoping 

Comments, Spokane Tribe of Indians 

West Plains Mixed-Use Development 

Project,’’ on the first page of your 

comments. 

Public Comment Availability 

Comments, including names and 

addresses of respondents, will be 

available for public review at the BIA 

address shown above, 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 in 

accordance with section 1503.1 of the 

Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 through 

1508) implementing the procedural 

requirements of the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

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

related Department of the Interior 

requirements in the Department of the 

Interior Manual (516 DM 2), and is in 

the exercise of authority delegated to the 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs by 

209 DM 8.1. 

Dated: August 13, 2009. 

Larry Echo Hawk, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. E9–19882 Filed 8–18–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R8–R–2008–N0322; 80230–1265– 

0000–S3] 

Desert National Wildlife Refuge 

Complex, Clark, Lincoln, and Nye 

Counties, NV 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability: Final 

comprehensive conservation plan/ 

environmental impact statement. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a Final Comprehensive 

Conservation Plan/Environmental 

Impact Statement (CCP/EIS) for the 

Desert National Wildlife Refuge 

Complex. The Desert National Wildlife 

Refuge Complex is composed of Ash 

Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, 

Desert National Wildlife Refuge, Moapa 

Valley National Wildlife Refuge and 

Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge. 

The final CCP/EIS, prepared pursuant to 

the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997, and in 

accordance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Notices 41929 

describes how the Service will manage 

the Refuges for the next 15 years. 

DATES: We will sign a record of decision 

no sooner than 30 days after publication 

of this notice. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the final CCP/EIS 

may be obtained by writing to the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Attn: Mark 

Pelz, CA/NV Refuge Planning Office, 

2800 Cottage Way, W–1832, 

Sacramento, CA 95825–1846. Copies of 

the final CCP/EIS may be viewed at this 

address or at the Desert National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex, 4701 North 

Torrey Pines, Las Vegas, NV 89130. The 

final CCP/EIS will also be available for 

viewing and downloading online at 

http://www.fws.gov/desertcomplex/ 

publicreview.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cynthia Martinez, Project Leader, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, 4701 North 

Torrey Pines, Las Vegas, NV 89130, 

phone (702) 515–5450 or Mark Pelz, 

Chief, Refuge Planning, 2800 Cottage 

Way, W–1832, Sacramento, CA 95825, 

phone (916) 414–6504. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee), which amended the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966, requires us 

to develop a CCP for each national 

wildlife refuge. The purpose in 

developing a CCP is to provide refuge 

managers with a 15-year plan for 

achieving refuge purposes and 

contributing toward the mission of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and our policies. In 

addition to outlining broad management 

direction on conserving wildlife and 

their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities 

available to the public, including 

opportunities for hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation and photography, 

environmental education and 

interpretation. 

We initiated the CCP/EIS for the 

Desert National Wildlife Refuge 

Complex in August 2002. At that time 

and throughout the process, we 

requested, considered, and incorporated 

public scoping comments in numerous 

ways. Our public outreach included a 

Federal Register (67 FR 54229, August 

21, 2002) notice of intent, agency and 

Tribal scoping meetings, five public 

scoping meetings, a Federal Register (73 

FR 39979, July 11, 2008) notice of 

availability, six public comment 

workshops, several planning updates, 

and a CCP Web page. We received over 

230 scoping comments during the 60- 

day public comment period. 

Background 

Ash Meadows Refuge was established 

in 1984 under the authority of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended. It comprises 23,000 acres of 

spring-fed wetlands, mesquite bosques, 

and desert uplands that provide habitat 

for at least 24 plants and animal species 

found nowhere else in the world. The 

Refuge is located 90 miles northwest of 

Las Vegas and 30 miles west of 

Pahrump. 

Desert Refuge was originally 

established in 1936 by Executive Order 

No. 7373 and subsequently modified by 

Public Land Order 4079, for the 

protection, enhancement and 

maintenance of wildlife resources 

including bighorn sheep. Located just 

north of Las Vegas, Nevada, the 1.6 

million acre refuge is the largest 

National Wildlife Refuge in the lower 48 

States. 

The Moapa Valley Refuge was 

established in 1979 under the authority 

of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 

as amended, to secure habitat for the 

endangered Moapa dace. The Refuge is 

located on 116 acres in northeastern 

Clark County. Due to its small size, 

fragile habitats, on-going habitat 

restoration work, and unsafe structures, 

the Refuge is currently closed to the 

general public. 

The Pahranagat Refuge was 

established in 1963, under the authority 

of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, 

as amended, to protect habitat for 

migrating birds in the Pahranagat 

Valley. The 5,382 acre refuge consists of 

marshes, meadows, lakes, and upland 

desert habitat. It provides nesting, 

resting, and feeding areas for waterfowl, 

shorebirds, wading birds, and song birds 

including the endangered southwestern 

willow flycatcher. 

Alternatives 

The final CCP/EIS identifies and 

evaluates three alternatives for 

managing Ash Meadows and Moapa 

Valley Refuges and four alternatives for 

managing Desert and Pahranagat 

Refuges for the next 15 years. The 

alternative for each Refuge that appears 

to best meet the refuge purposes is 

identified as the preferred alternative. 

The preferred alternatives were 

identified based on the analysis 

presented in the draft CCP/EIS, which 

was modified following the completion 

of the public comment period based on 

comments received from other agencies, 

Tribal governments, non-governmental 

organizations, or individuals. Appendix 

M of the final CCP/EIS contains a list of 

the comments we received and our 

responses to comments. 

Alternatives for Ash Meadows National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Under Alternative A, the no action 

alternative, we would continue to 

manage the Refuge as we have in the 

past. We would implement habitat 

restoration plans that have already been 

completed. No major changes in habitat 

management would occur. The existing 

wildlife observation, photography, 

environmental education, and 

interpretation programs would remain 

unchanged. 

Under Alternative B, we would plan 

and implement springhead, channel, 

and landscape restoration on about twothirds of the Refuge. Surveys and 

monitoring for special status species 

would be expanded as would efforts to 

control invasive plants and animals. 

Environmental education, interpretation 

and wildlife observation opportunities 

would be improved and expanded and 

a new visitor contact station and 

headquarters facility would be 

constructed. 

Under the preferred alternative, 

Alternative C, we would seek to restore 

springheads, channels and floodplains 

throughout the Refuge. Surveys and 

monitoring, habitat protection, pest 

management, and research would also 

be substantially expanded. 

Environmental education, 

interpretation, and wildlife observation 

programs would be similar to but 

slightly less than Alternative B. 

Alternatives for the Desert National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Under Alternative A, the no action 

alternative, we would continue current 

management for bighorn sheep and 

other species. We would also continue 

to offer limited opportunities for 

wildlife observation and photography, 

environmental education, and 

interpretation at Corn Creek. Existing 

backcountry recreation opportunities 

would continue to be offered including 

bighorn sheep hunting, hiking, camping, 

horseback riding, and backpacking. In 

addition, under this and all other 

alternatives, we would design and 

construct a visitor center and 

administrative offices at Corn Creek and 

continue to protect the wilderness 

character of the 1.4 million acre 

proposed Desert Wilderness. 

Under Alternative B, wildlife 

management programs would be similar 

to Alternative A, with minor 

improvements, including expanded 

surveys for bighorn sheep and 

installation of post and cable fencing 

along the southern boundary. This 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
41930 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2009 / Notices 

alternative would also include a 

substantial expansion in visitor services 

over Alternative A, including a new 

environmental education program, 

improved roads, a new auto tour route, 

and new wildlife viewing trails. 

Under the preferred alternative, 

Alternative C, we would expand 

inventory and monitoring for bighorn 

sheep, special status species, and 

vegetation and wildlife communities 

throughout the Refuge. Under this 

alternative, we would also use 

prescribed fire and naturally ignited 

fires in Refuge plant communities where 

appropriate to restore vegetation 

characteristics representative of a 

natural fire regime. Alternative C would 

also include fencing along the eastern 

boundary where appropriate as well as 

the permanent closure of illegal roads 

and rehabilitation of damaged habitat 

along the southern and eastern 

boundaries. Visitor services under this 

alternative would be the same as under 

Alternative B except no auto tour route 

or wildlife viewing trails would be 

developed. 

Under Alternative D, the wildlife 

management and inventory and 

monitoring programs would be similar 

to Alternative C. However, under this 

alternative, visitor services would be 

scaled back from the other alternatives. 

For example, the visitor center would 

only be staffed on weekends during the 

off-peak seasons and there would be no 

road improvements on the Refuge. 

Alternatives for Moapa Valley National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Under Alternative A, the no action 

alternative, we would continue to 

manage the Refuge as we have in the 

recent past. Springhead and channel 

restoration work and visitor facilities on 

the Plummer Unit would be completed. 

The limited inventory and monitoring 

program would also continue. However, 

the Refuge would remain closed to the 

public, except by special arrangement. 

Under Alternative B, wildlife 

management programs would be similar 

to Alternative A, with minor 

improvements, including expanded 

surveys for sensitive species and their 

habitats, and strategies for removing 

nonnative aquatic species. We would 

also restore native vegetation along the 

springheads and channels on the 

Pederson Unit. This alternative would 

also include a substantial expansion in 

visitor services over Alternative A, 

including opening the Refuge on 

weekends and improved visitor 

facilities. 

Under the preferred alternative, 

Alternative C, wildlife management 

would be similar to Alternative B, but 

would include increased monitoring 

and the development of a long term 

inventory and monitoring plan for 

sensitive species. In addition, we would 

restore the springheads and channels 

and associated native vegetation on the 

Apcar unit. Under Alternative C, we 

would expand the Refuge acquisition 

boundary by 1,765 acres and pursue 

acquisition of the lands within the 

boundary to protect habitat for Moapa 

dace and other sensitive species. Under 

this alternative, the Refuge would be 

open to visitors every day, the 

environmental education program 

would be expanded, and additional 

trails would be constructed. 

Alternatives for Pahranagat National 

Wildlife Refuge 

Under Alternative A, the no action 

alternative, we would continue to 

manage Pahranagat Refuge as we have 

in the recent past. The in-progress 

hydrology studies would be completed 

and a wetland habitat management plan 

would be developed and implemented. 

Riparian habitat would be maintained 

for the southwestern willow flycatcher 

and other migratory birds. Under this 

alternative, we would maintain the 

fishing, hunting, wildlife observation, 

and environmental education and 

interpretation opportunities on the 

Refuge. The campground would be 

maintained in its current state. 

Under Alternative B, we would 

expand wildlife management and visitor 

services on the Refuge. Wildlife surveys 

and efforts to control invasive plants 

would be expanded and a new refugium 

for the Pahranagat roundtail chub would 

be developed. The visitor contact station 

would be expanded and new 

interpretive kiosk would be developed. 

The campground would also be 

maintained but fees would be charged 

and the maximum length of stay would 

be reduced from 14 to 7 days. 

Under Alternative C, management 

would be similar to Alternative B, with 

the following exceptions. Under this 

alternative, we would develop and 

implement restoration plans for 

degraded springs on the Refuge. In 

addition, a new visitor contact station, 

interpretive walking trail, and photo 

blind would also be developed. Under 

this alternative, we would convert the 

campground to a day-use area. 

Under the preferred alternative, 

Alternative D, management would be 

similar to Alternative C, except we 

would seek to acquire additional water 

rights for the Refuge to provide more 

flexibility in wetland management. 

Also, we would restore native upland 

habitat adjacent to Lower Pahranagat 

Lake and expand the surveying and 

monitoring programs under this 

alternative. Visitor services would be 

similar to Alternative C except we 

would close existing boat ramps and 

offer alternative car-top boat launches. 

Decision Process 

The final CCP/EIS contains our 

responses to all comments received on 

the draft document. We will make a 

decision no sooner than 30 days after 

the publication of the final CCP/EIS. We 

anticipate that a Record of Decision will 

be issued by the Service in early 2009. 

We provide this notice under 

regulations implementing NEPA (40 

CFR 1506.6). 

Dated: August 13, 2009. 

Ren Lohoefener, 

Regional Director, California and Nevada 

Region, Sacramento, California. 

[FR Doc. E9–19843 Filed 8–18–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Indian Gaming 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Approved Tribal— 

State Compact Amendment. 

SUMMARY: This notice publishes 

approval of the 2009 Amendments to 

the Stockbridge-Munsee Community 

(‘‘Tribe’’) and the State of Wisconsin 

Gaming Compact of 1992, as Amended 

in 1998 and 2003. 

DATES: Effective Date: August 19, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Paula L. Hart, Acting Director, Office of 

Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy 

Assistant Secretary—Policy and 

Economic Development, Washington, 

DC 20240, (202) 219–4066. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under 

section 11 of the Indian Gaming 

Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA), Public 

Law 100–497, 25 U.S.C. 2710, the 

Secretary of the Interior shall publish in 

the Federal Register notice of approved 

Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of 

engaging in Class III gaming activities 

on Indian lands. This Amendment 

allows the Tribe to expand the pool of 

prospective lenders for construction or 

improvements to a Tribal gaming 

facility from State or federally chartered 

banks to include other federally 

recognized tribes. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES