Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 207 / Friday, October 26, 2007 / Notices 60883 

4. Update on BLM land use planning 

efforts in the Powder River Basin of 

Wyoming and Montana. 

5. Other Coal Lease Applications and 

issues that may arise prior to the 

meeting. 

The RCT may generate 

recommendation(s) for any or all of 

these topics and other topics that may 

arise prior to the meeting date. 

The meeting will serve as a forum for 

public discussion on Federal coal 

management issues of concern in the 

Powder River Basin region. Any party 

interested in providing comments or 

data related to the above pending 

applications, or any party proposing 

other issues to be considered by the 

RCT, may either do so in writing to the 

State Director (922), BLM Wyoming 

State Office, 5353 Yellowstone Road, 

Cheyenne, WY 82009, no later than 

November 21, 2007, or by addressing 

the RCT with his/her concerns at the 

meeting on December 6, 2007. 

The draft agenda for the meeting 

follows: 

1. Introduction of RCT Members and 

guests. 

2. Approval of the Minutes of the 

January 18, 2007 Regional Coal Team 

meeting held in Casper, Wyoming. 

3. Coal activity since the last RCT 

meeting. 

4. Industry Presentations on Lease 

Applications: BTU Western Resources, 

Modification of the Porcupine LBA. 

5. BLM presentation on Powder River 

Basin coal review study. 

6. U.S. Geological Survey presentation 

on Coal Inventory. 

7. BLM land use planning efforts. 

8. Other pending coal actions and 

other discussion items that may arise. 

9. Discussion of the next meeting. 

10. Adjourn. 

Dated: October 22, 2007. 

Robert A. Bennett, 

State Director. 

[FR Doc. E7–21145 Filed 10–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement/ 

Comprehensive Management Plan; Ala 

Kahakai National Historic Trail County 

of Hawaii, State of Hawaii; Notice of 

Availability 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, as amended), and 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

Regulations (40 CFR part 1500–1508), 

the National Park Service, Department 

of the Interior, has prepared a Draft 

Comprehensive Management Plan and 

programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement identifying and evaluating 

two alternatives to current 

administration and management of the 

Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. 

These alternatives respond to the 

National Trails System Act (16 U.S.C. 

1241–1251), NPS planning 

requirements, and the issues identified 

during public scoping. They address 

trail administration and management, 

cultural and natural resource protection, 

and use of the trail by local residents, 

Native Hawaiians, and the visiting 

public. 

When approved, the comprehensive 

management plan will guide, for 

approximately 15 years, the National 

Park Service in administering, 

preserving, protecting, developing, 

managing, and maintaining the 175-mile 

trail which includes portions of the 

ancient and historic ala loa (long trail; 

coastal trail around the island). The EIS 

compares baseline conditions of a ‘‘no 

action’’ alternative with potential 

impacts and two ‘‘action’’ alternatives 

and, where appropriate, suggests 

mitigation measures to reduce the 

intensity of the potential effect or to 

avoid the potential effect. Three other 

preliminary alternatives were 

considered but rejected because they 

did not achieve the objectives of the 

plan or were infeasible. An 

‘‘environmentally preferred’’ alternative 

is also identified. 

Background: The National Park 

Service (NPS) administers the Ala 

Kahakai National Historic Trail (NHT), 

added to the National Trails System by 

the U.S. Congress on November 13, 

2000. The legislation authorizing the 

Ala Kahakai NHT identifies an 

approximately 175-mile portion of 

prehistoric ala loa (long trail) and other 

trails on or parallel to the seacoast 

extending from Upolu Point on the 

north tip of Hawaii Island down the 

west coast of the island around South 

Point to the east boundary of Hawaii 

Volcanoes National Park. The Ala 

Kahakai NHT combines surviving 

elements of the ancient ala loa with 

segments of later government trails 

(alanui aupuni), which developed on or 

parallel to the traditional routes, and 

more recent pathways and roads that 

create links between the historic 

segments. 

The purposes of the Ala Kahakai 

NHT, derived from the legislative 

history, the Feasibility Study, and the 

public scoping phase completed in 

2003, are to: 

• Preserve, protect, reestablish as 

necessary, and maintain a substantial 

portion of the ancient ala loa and 

associated resources and values, along 

with linking trails on or parallel to the 

shoreline on Hawaii Island, and 

• Provide for a high quality 

experience, enjoyment, and education 

(guided by Native Hawaiian protocol 

and etiquette) while protecting the 

trail’s natural and cultural heritage and 

respecting private and community 

interest. 

Federal ownership of the Ala Kahakai 

NHT is limited to the trail alignment 

within the four national parks it links: 

Pu’ukohola Heiau National Historic 

Site, Kaloko-Honokohau National 

Historical Park (NHP), Pu’uhonua o 

Honaunau NHP, and Hawaii Volcanoes 

National Park. Approximately 17% of 

the NHT is within the boundaries of 

these national parks. With trail 

authorization, these trail segments 

become federally protected components 

of the NHT, in compliance with § 3(a)(3) 

of the National Trails System Act. 

The National Trails System Act, as 

amended, requires the preparation of a 

comprehensive management plan (CMP) 

for each new trail in the system. The 

CMP is intended to provide direction for 

natural and cultural resource 

preservation, education, and trail user 

experience of the Ala Kahakai NHT over 

the next 15 years. It considers the trail 

in its entirety. It identifies the necessity 

of community partnerships to protect 

trail resources and provide appropriate 

trail user services. As a partnership 

endeavor, the success of this plan is not 

solely determined by the NPS; rather its 

success rests with the will and 

preservation of other local government 

agencies, communities, organizations, 

neighborhood associations, and 

individuals who have the capacity and 

desire to implement actions within this 

plan. 

Proposed Plan and Alternatives: 

Alternative C (both the agency-preferred 

as well as the ‘‘environmentally 

preferred’’ alternative), is based on the 

traditional Hawaiian trail system in 

which multiple trail alignments within 

the ahupua’a (mountain to sea land 

division) are integral to land use and 

stewardship. Within the planning 

period of 15 years, the goal would be to 

complete the linear trail within the 

priority zone from Kawaihae to 

Pu’uhonau o Honaunau NHP (73 miles) 

and to protect other segments outside of 

that area as feasible. In addition, on 

publicly-owned lands the Ala Kahakai 

NHT would include inland portions of 

the ala loa or other historic trails that 

run lateral to the shoreline and would 

be connected to ancient or historic 

mauka-makai (mountain to sea) trails 

that would have traditionally been part 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
60884 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 207 / Friday, October 26, 2007 / Notices 

of the ahupua’a system. Through an 

agreement, the state of Hawaii could 

convey to the NPS a less-than-fee 

management interest in trail segments 

that are state-owned under the 

Highways Act of 1892 within the Ala 

Kahakai NHT corridor. The NPS would 

then be responsible for managing these 

segments and federal law would fully 

apply. However, in cooperation with the 

NPS, local communities of the ahupua’a 

would be encouraged to take 

responsibility for trail management 

using the traditional Hawaiian 

principles of land management and 

stewardship. The NPS would offer 

technical assistance and limited 

financial assistance to these 

management partners. Partnerships with 

state and county agencies, community 

organizations, and private individuals 

would help protect trail resources and 

provide appropriate trail user services. 

The Ala Kahakai Trail Association 

would be expected to be robust enough 

play a major part in trail management, 

promotion, and funding. An auto tour 

would be completed that would lead 

visitors to 18 sites associated with the 

trail. 

Alternative A constitutes the ‘‘No 

Action’’ alternative, under which 

existing programs, facilities, staffing, 

and funding would generally continue 

at their current levels. The Ala Kahakai 

NHT would consist of trail segments 

within the four national parks through 

which it passes and only a few other 

segments, most likely on state lands. A 

continuous trail, as recommended in the 

Feasibility Study, would be the goal but 

would not be achievable, even in the 

long-term. An auto tour would be 

completed. Recreation along the trail 

and interpretation of its history would 

generally be limited to these sites. 

Alternative B proposes the completion 

of a single continuous trail composed of 

unaltered or verified ancient and 

historic portions of the ala loa linked as 

needed by later pre-1892 trails, 

pathways, and modern connector trails. 

Within the planning period of 15 years, 

the goal would be to complete the linear 

trail within the priority zone from 

Kawaihae to Pu’uhonua o Honaunau 

NHP and to protect other segments 

outside of that area as feasible. In the 

long term, cultural and natural 

resources along the entire trail tread and 

agreed-upon adjacent areas would be 

protected and interpreted to the public. 

The NPS would administer the trail, but 

management outside of the national 

parks would remain with the land 

managing agency or landowner. The 

NPS would offer technical assistance 

and limited financial assistance to these 

management partners. Partnerships with 

state and county agencies, the Ala 

Kahakai Trail Association, community 

organizations, and private individuals 

would help protect trail resources and 

provide appropriate trail user services. 

An auto tour would be completed. 

Scoping Summary: On April 4, 2003, 

the NPS published the Notice of Intent 

formally initiating the conservation 

planning and environmental impact 

analysis process for the Ala Kahakai 

NHT comprehensive management plan; 

the scoping period extended through 

June 28, 2003. Over 1,830 public 

scoping meeting announcements were 

mailed using an address list that 

included hiking enthusiasts affiliated 

with E Man Na Ala Held, various 

legislators, the Caleche-Hanukkah N.P. 

contact list, and interested individuals, 

organizations, and agencies that 

provided their contact information to 

the trail staff. The NPS advertised 

meetings in West Hawaii Today and 

Hawaii Tribune-Herald. Large signs 

were posted on meeting days in highvisibility areas on adjacent roadways 

and on buildings where the meetings 

were held to encourage walk-by and 

drive-by participation. Meeting 

announcements also appeared in the 

Ala Kahakai NHT and E Man Na Ala 

Held newsletters. Altogether nine open 

house scoping meetings were hosted 

between March 22 and June 28, 2003. At 

the meetings, attendees were 

encouraged to submit formal input 

through a Mana’o Form, a questionnaire 

about how the trail should be managed. 

A total of 200 people representing the 

general public, private landowners, trail 

advocacy groups, native Hawaiian 

organizations, and state, county, and 

federal agencies attended these 

meetings. About 25 Mana’o Forms were 

returned to the trail office. In addition, 

the planning team met with numerous 

individuals, community groups, private 

landowners, and government agency 

representatives to understand their 

concerns and visions for the Ala 

Kahakai NHT. Using the information for 

all these sources, the planning team 

prepared draft versions of the purpose 

and significance statements, 

management prescriptions, and 

management alternatives. 

Between July 2003 and March 2004, 

the planning team developed five 

preliminary alternatives for future 

management based on information 

gained from the scoping process: No 

Action, Single Ala Kahakai Trail 

alternative, Ahupua’a Trail Systems 

alternative, Historic Trail Clusters 

alternative, and Public Lands 

alternative. The NPS provided a booklet 

to the public describing these 

alternatives and inviting comment. In 

addition, the NPS conducted nine 

public meetings between April 17 and 

June 19, 2004, to gather comments on 

the alternatives. The comment period 

for the draft alternatives closed on June 

25, 2004. Subsequently the planning 

team prepared a draft alternatives 

document that eliminated alternative E 

because it was favored in public 

meetings only as a step to completing 

the entire trail. Eventually, alternative D 

was eliminated for the same reason. 

In December 2006, to ensure that 

issues were properly stated and 

addressed, an internal review draft of 

this document was sent to the four 

national parks on Hawaii Island, other 

National Park Service reviewers, and 

reviewers in Hawaii who have been 

involved in the study process and have 

knowledge of the Ala Kahakai NHT. 

These reviewers’ comments were 

incorporated into the public review 

draft. 

Commenting On The Draft EIS: Six 

public workshops on the proposed plan 

will be hosted during the week of 

November 5–10, 2007 at various 

locations on the island of Hawaii. 

Locations, dates, and other workshop 

details will be advertised by direct 

mailing and notices placed in the local 

newspapers. All interested individuals, 

organizations, and agencies will be 

encouraged to participate and provide 

comments, suggestions, and additional 

information. All written comments must 

be postmarked not later than 60 days 

following publication in the Federal 

Register by EPA of their notice of filing 

of the Draft EIS (as soon as this date can 

be confirmed it will be announced on 

the park’s Web site, and included in 

workshop mailings). 

Written comments on the Draft EIS/ 

CMP should be addressed to 

Superintendent, Ala Kahakai NHT, 73–

4786 Kanalani Street, #14, Kailua–Kona, 

HI 96740. Questions at this time 

regarding the comprehensive 

management plan and EIS planning 

process or inquiries about public 

meetings should be addressed to the 

superintendent either by mail or by 

telephone at (805) 326–6012. The 

document will be sent directly to those 

who have requested it, and will also be 

available at the park headquarters and 

local libraries, or electronically at http:// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/alka (an 

electronic public comment form is also 

provided at this Web site). 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. 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 207 / Friday, October 26, 2007 / Notices 60885 

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. 

Decision: Following careful analysis 

of public and agency comments on the 

Draft EIS, it is anticipated at this time 

that the final EIS would be available in 

winter of 2008. As a delegated EIS, the 

official responsible for the final decision 

is the Regional Director, Pacific West 

Region. A Record of Decision would not 

be prepared sooner than 30 days 

following release of the Final EIS/CMP; 

notice of the decision will be posted in 

the Federal Register and announced in 

local and regional newspapers. 

Following approval of the 

comprehensive management plan and 

EIS, the official responsible for 

undertaking implementation of the plan 

will be the Superintendent, Ala Kahakai 

National Historic Trail. 

Dated: October 18, 2007. 

George J. Turnbull, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

[FR Doc. 07–5305 Filed 10–25–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–M 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Final General Management Plan/ 

Environmental Impact Statement; 

Record of Decision; Flight 93 National 

Memorial, Pennsylvania 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of the 

Record of Decision for the Final General 

Management Plan/Environmental 

Impact Statement, Flight 93 National 

Memorial. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Sec. 102(2)(C) of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969, Pub. L. 91–190, 83 Stat. 852, 

853, codified as amended at 42 U.S.C. 

4332(2)(C), the National Park Service 

announces the availability of the Record 

of Decision for the Final General 

Management Plan and Environmental 

Impact Statement (Final GMP/EIS) for 

the Flight 93 National Memorial in 

Pennsylvania. On July 23, 2007, the 

Regional Director, Northeast Region, 

approved the Record of Decision for the 

project, selecting Alternative 2—

Preferred Design Alternative, which was 

described on pages II–14 to II–23 of the 

Final GMP/EIS and announced to the 

public in a Notice of Availability 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 21, 2007. 

The selected alternative and one other 

alternative, Alternative 1—No Action, 

were analyzed in the Draft and Final 

Environmental Impact Statements. Each 

alternative was evaluated as to how it 

would guide the development and 

future management of the national 

memorial over the next 15 to 20 years 

with regard to the following issues: (1) 

The types of management actions 

required for the development, 

protection and preservation of park 

resources; (2) The types and general 

intensities of development (including 

the memorial features, visitor facilities, 

transportation and access requirements) 

associated with the public enjoyment 

and use of the area, including general 

locations, timing of implementation and 

anticipated costs; (3) Visitor carrying 

capacities and implementation 

commitments for major aspects of the 

memorial; and (4) Potential 

modifications to the external boundaries 

of the park, if any, and the reasons for 

the proposed changes. The full range of 

foreseeable environmental 

consequences was assessed and 

disclosed for historic and cultural 

resources, natural resources, land use, 

transportation, socioeconomic impacts, 

visual and aesthetic impacts, energy 

requirements, and public health and 

safety. 

The NPS has selected Alternative 2 

because it best fulfills the goals of the 

Flight 93 National Memorial’s Missions 

Statement, as well as the purpose and 

intent of the Flight 93 National 

Memorial Act. The selected alternative 

commemorates the actions of the 

passengers and crew by creating a 

designed memorial landscape, which 

blends with the contour of the land and 

enhances the physical features of the 

site. It protects the final resting places 

of the passengers and crew and places 

special attention on providing an 

appropriate setting for the memorial. A 

new visitor facility will provide for 

interpretive exhibits, public education 

and outreach, and visitor services. The 

public will have a broader range of 

opportunities to learn about the deeds of 

the passengers and crew members and 

the events that occurred on September 

11, 2001. The selected alternative also 

provides a venue for visitors to get 

closer to the crash site while removing 

parking and other visitor support 

facilities from the views around the 

crash site. Under the selected 

alternative, visitor traffic will be 

contained within the site and removed 

from the neighboring villages to create 

safer roadway conditions and 

significantly improve conditions for 

residents living along these routes. The 

selected alternative will not result in the 

impairment of resources and values. 

The construction costs to build the 

memorial features and the related 

infrastructure would be shared through 

a partnership involving the public, the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and 

the federal government. 

The Record of Decision includes a 

statement of the decision made, 

synopses of other alternatives 

considered, the basis for the decision, a 

finding of no impairment of park 

resources and values, and an overview 

of public involvement in the decisionmaking process. This decision is the 

result of a public planning process that 

began with publication of a Notice of 

Intent in the Federal Register on 

December 10, 2003. The official 

responsible for this decision is the NPS 

Regional Director, Northeast Region. 

ADDRESSES: The Record of Decision for 

the Final GMP/EIS for the Flight 93 

National Memorial is available online at 

http://www.flight93memorialproject.org 

or http://www.planning.nps.gov/ 

plans.cfm. Copies may be obtained by 

contacting the Superintendent, National 

Parks of Western Pennsylvania, National 

Park Service, 109 W. Main St., Suite 

104, Somerset, PA 15501. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joanne Hanley, Superintendent, 

National Parks of Western Pennsylvania, 

National Park Service, 109 W. Main St., 

Suite 104, Somerset, PA 15501, phone 

(814) 443–4557, 

joanne_hanley@nps.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Flight 

93 National Memorial Act (Pub. L. 107–

226; 116 Stat. 1345), enacted on 

September 24, 2002, authorized ‘‘a 

national memorial to commemorate the 

passengers and crew of Flight 93 who, 

on September 11, 2001, courageously 

gave their lives thereby thwarting a 

planned attack on our Nation’s Capital.’’

This legislation enabled the creation 

and development of the new Flight 93 

National Memorial in Stonycreek 

Township, Somerset County, 

Pennsylvania and specifically 

designated the crash site of Flight 93 as 

the site to honor the passengers and 

crew of Flight 93. Pub. L. 107–226 

authorized the Secretary of the Interior 

to administer the Flight 93 National 

Memorial as a unit of the national park 

system. This Act also created the Flight 

93 Advisory Commission and charged it 

with: (1) Advising the Secretary on the 

boundary of the memorial site; (2) 

submitting to the Secretary a report 

containing recommendations for the 

planning, design, construction, and 

long-term management of a permanent 

memorial at the crash site; and (3) 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES