[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 217 (Friday, November 8, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 88805-88808]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25942]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[BLM_OR_FRN_MO4500183398]


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

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In conformance 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 the Proposed Lakeview Resource Management Plan (RMP) Amendment 
and Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and is announcing the 
start of a 30-day protest period.

DATES: This notice announces a 30-day protest period on the Proposed 
Lakeview RMP Amendment, beginning on the date the Environmental

[[Page 88806]]

Protection Agency (EPA) publishes its Notice of Availability (NOA) of 
the proposed RMP amendment/final EIS in the Federal Register. The EPA 
usually publishes its NOAs on Fridays. Protests must be postmarked or 
electronically submitted on the BLM's ePlanning website during the 30-
day protest period.

ADDRESSES: The proposed RMP amendment/final EIS is available for review 
on the BLM ePlanning project website at https://eplanning.blm.gov/eplanning-ui/project/114300/510 and at the BLM Lakeview District, 1301 
South G Street, Lakeview, OR 97630.
    Instructions for filing a protest with the BLM can be found at: 
https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/filing-a-plan-protest and at 43 CFR 1610.5-2. Protests must be 
submitted to the ePlanning website listed above or as a hard copy to: 
BLM Director, Attention: Protest Coordinator (HQ210), PO Box 151029, 
Lakewood, CO 80215.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Michael Collins, Planning and 
Environmental Coordinator, telephone: 541-947-2177; 1301 South G 
Street, Lakeview, OR 97630; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#355759586a5a476a59436a4758456a41505458755759581b525a43"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="debcb2b381b1ac81b2a881acb3ae81aabbbfb39ebcb2b3f0b9b1a8">[email protected]</span></a>. 
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. 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 (OR/WA) State Director has prepared the Proposed 
Lakeview RMP Amendment and Final EIS that analyzes alternatives that 
would update the existing 2003 Lakeview RMP and Record of Decision 
(ROD), as amended by the 2015 Approved Oregon Greater Sage-grouse 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 for the Planning Effort

    The purpose and need for this proposed RMP amendment/final 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 within the planning 
area. The BLM has determined that 106 inventory units totaling 
1,655,290 acres within the planning area contain wilderness 
characteristics.

Alternatives Including the Proposed Action

    The proposed RMP amendment/final EIS analyzes six action 
alternatives and a No Action Alternative. The 90-day public comment 
period for the Draft Lakeview RMP Amendment and Draft EIS ended on 
September 5, 2024. The BLM held four public meetings during the public 
comment period. The BLM considered all input received from the public, 
consulting Tribes, and cooperating agencies, and incorporated such 
input into the proposed RMP amendment as appropriate. This input 
resulted in the clarification of text, minor changes to the range of 
alternatives, and the identification of the proposed RMP amendment 
(Alternative F), which is within the range of alternatives and effects 
analyzed in the draft RMP amendment/draft EIS.
    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 
included in the 2010 Settlement Agreement would continue to preclude 
the BLM from completing any management actions within inventory units 
that the BLM has determined possess wilderness characteristics that 
could reduce the unit's size or diminish the unit's wilderness 
characteristics to such an extent that it would no longer meet the 
BLM's 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; 34 units and portions of two 
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 (VRM) class I, land 
tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for all 
rights-of-way, and would include restrictions on mineral development. 
The remaining 77 units and portions of two units (approximately 
1,381,610 acres) would be managed as VRM class II, land tenure zone 1 
(retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for major rights-of-
way, and include some restrictions on mineral development. 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 duration 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 VRM class II, land tenure zone 1 (retention in the public 
domain), exclusion zones for major rights-of-way, and include 
restrictions on mineral development. 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 four 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 two units (approximately 1,161,199

[[Page 88807]]

acres). The remaining five units and portions of three units 
(approximately 74,529 acres) would be managed under the 2003 Lakeview 
RMP, as amended; the BLM would allow other multiple uses while not 
protecting wilderness characteristics. The 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 two 
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 remaining 46 units (approximately 583,332 acres) would be 
managed under the 2003 Lakeview RMP as amended; the BLM would allow 
other multiple uses while not protecting wilderness characteristics. 
The area open to cross-country OHV use would be reduced to 
approximately 70,573 acres of expressly defined areas; approximately 
11,000 acres would be closed to OHV use; and the remainder of the 
planning area, approximately 3 million acres, would be limited to 
existing or designated routes. Livestock grazing management would be 
the same as the No Action Alternative unless 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 management of livestock grazing or other uses or habitat 
restoration.
    Alternative E was developed with input from individual members of 
the Southeast 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). The remaining 12 units (approximately 
168,512 acres) would be managed under the 2003 Lakeview RMP as amended; 
the BLM would allow other multiple uses while not protecting wilderness 
characteristics. OHV and livestock grazing management throughout the 
planning area would be the same as the No Action Alternative.
    Alternative F, the proposed RMP amendment, was largely developed by 
combining components of Alternatives C and D from the draft RMP 
amendment/draft EIS, and to a lesser extent some components from 
Alternative B. Alternative F's OHV and livestock grazing management 
components are identical to Alternative D. Alternative F would 
designate 42,547 acres within 24 wilderness characteristics units and 
portions of two other units as WSAs under section 202 of the FLPMA. 
These proposed WSAs would be managed as VRM class I, land tenure zone 1 
(retention in the public domain), exclusion zones for all rights-of-
way, and would include restrictions on mineral development. Alternative 
F would also prioritize protections for wilderness characteristics over 
other multiple uses on 373,132 acres in an additional eight units and 
portions of seven other units. These units would be managed as VRM 
class II, land tenure zone 1 (retention in the public domain), 
exclusion zones for major rights-of-way, and include some restrictions 
on mineral development. The BLM would balance the management of 
wilderness characteristics with other resources and multiple uses on 
738,665 acres located in 37 units and portions of 12 units. The BLM 
would manage the remaining 30 units and portions of nine units that 
total 495,332 acres in accordance with the 2003 Lakeview RMP, as 
amended, where other multiple uses are provided for without any 
wilderness characteristics protections.
    The proposed RMP amendment/final EIS was developed based on the 
consideration of public comments, cooperating agency and Tribal 
government-to-government consultations, updates to the highest quality 
science and information, and by combining elements of the alternatives 
analyzed in the draft RMP amendment/draft EIS. The proposed RMP 
amendment is within the range of alternatives considered in the draft 
RMP amendment/draft EIS.
    Alternative F 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. It 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. It 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 the 
FLPMA.

Protest of the Proposed RMP

    The BLM planning regulations state that any person who participated 
in the preparation of the RMP amendment and has an interest that will 
or might be adversely affected by approval of the Proposed Lakeview RMP 
Amendment may protest its approval to the BLM Director. Protesting the 
proposed RMP amendment constitutes the final opportunity for 
administrative review of the proposed land use planning decisions prior 
to the BLM adopting an approved RMP amendment. Instructions for filing 
a protest regarding the proposed RMP amendment with the BLM Director 
may be found online at https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-and-nepa/public-participation/filing-a-plan-protest and at 43 CFR 1610.5-2. All 
protests must be in writing and mailed to the appropriate address or 
submitted electronically through the BLM ePlanning project website (see 
ADDRESSES). Protests submitted by any other means will be invalid. The 
BLM Director will render a written decision on each protest. The 
Director's decision shall be the final decision of the Department of 
the Interior. Responses to valid protest issues will be compiled and 
documented in a Protest Resolution Report made available following the 
protest resolution online at: https://www.blm.gov/programs/planning-
and-nepa/public-participation/protest-

[[Page 88808]]

resolution-reports. Upon resolution of protests, the BLM will issue a 
ROD and Approved RMP.

(Authority: 40 CFR 1501.9, 40 CFR 1506.9, 43 CFR 1610.2, 43 CFR 
1610.5)

Barry R. Bushue,
State Director.
[FR Doc. 2024-25942 Filed 11-7-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4331-24-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>