Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 24, 2008 / Notices 55129 

Range 94 West, Sixth Principal 

Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 673, 

was accepted July 23, 2008. 

The plat and field notes representing 

the dependent resurvey of a portion of 

the north boundary and subdivisional 

lines, the subdivision of section 4, and 

the metes and bounds survey of lots 5 

and 6, section 4, Township 27 North, 

Range 103 West, of the Sixth Principal 

Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 687, 

was accepted August 7, 2008. 

The plat representing the entire 

record of the dependent resurvey of a 

portion of Tract 49, designed to restore 

the corners in their true locations 

according to the best available evidence, 

Township 52 North, Range 97 West, 

Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, 

Group No. 769, was accepted August 25, 

2008. 

The plat and field notes representing 

the dependent resurvey of Tract 105, 

portions of Tracts 106 and 107, a 

portion of the subdivisional lines, and 

the subdivision of Tracts 105 and 107, 

Township 52 North, Range 96 West, 

Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, 

Group No. 770, was accepted August 25, 

2008. 

The plat and field notes representing 

the dependent resurvey of the south, 

east and west boundaries, a portion of 

the north boundary, and the 

subdivisional lines, Township 54 North, 

Range 78 West, Sixth Principal 

Meridian, Wyoming, Group No. 767, 

was accepted September 16, 2008. 

The plat and field notes representing 

the dependent resurvey of a portion of 

the Ninth Standard Parallel North 

through Range 110 West, portions of the 

east boundary and subdivisional lines, 

and the subdivision of section 1, 

Township 36 North, Range 111 West, of 

the Sixth Principal Meridian, Wyoming, 

Group No. 768, was accepted September 

16, 2008. 

Copies of the preceding described 

plats and field notes are available to the 

public at a cost of $1.10 per page. 

Dated: September 17, 2008. 

John P. Lee, 

Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of Support 

Services. 

[FR Doc. E8–22337 Filed 9–23–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–22–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Land Management 

[OR–936–1430–ET; HAG–08–0208; WAOR– 

42920] 

Notice of Proposed Withdrawal 

Extension and Opportunity for Public 

Meeting; Washington 

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR 

2310.3–1, notice is hereby given that on 

the behalf of the United States Forest 

Service, the Bureau of Land 

Management proposes to extend Public 

Land Order No. 6776 for a 20-year 

period. This order withdrew 

approximately 8,950 acres of National 

Forest System land from surface entry 

and mining to protect the natural, 

scenic, and recreational values, and the 

investment in federal funds in the North 

Cascades Scenic Highway Zone. The 

withdrawal created by Public Land 

Order No. 6776 will expire on April 17, 

2010, unless extended. This notice also 

gives an opportunity to comment on the 

proposed action and to request a public 

meeting. 

DATES: Effective Date: Comments and 

requests for a public meeting must be 

received by December 23, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and meeting 

requests should be sent to the Oregon/ 

Washington State Director, BLM, P.O. 

Box 2965, Portland, Oregon 97208– 

2965. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gregory B. Graham, OkanoganWenatchee National Forest, 509–664– 

9262, or, Charles R. Roy, Bureau of Land 

Management Oregon/Washington State 

Office, 503–808–6189. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

United Stated Forest Service has filed 

an application to extend Public Land 

Order No. 6776 (55 FR 14422 (1990)) 

lands from location and entry under the 

mining laws for a 20 year period, subject 

to valid existing rights. 

The areas described aggregates 

approximately 8,950 acres in Chelan, 

Okanogan, Skagit, and Whatcom 

Counties. 

The use of a right-of-way, interagency 

agreement, or cooperative agreement 

would not adequately constrain nondiscretionary uses and would not 

provide adequate protection of the 

Federal investment in the improvements 

located on the land. 

There are no suitable alternative sites 

with equal or greater benefit to the 

government. 

No additional water rights will be 

needed to fulfill the purpose of the 

requested withdrawal. 

The preliminary mineral potential 

evaluation found the above described 

lands to have a high potential for 

locatable minerals. 

The purpose of the proposed 

withdrawal extension is to protect the 

scenic, natural, and recreation values, 

and the investment of federal funds at 

the North Cascades Scenic Highway 

Zone. 

For a period of 90 days from the date 

of publication of this notice, all persons 

who wish to submit comments, 

suggestions, or objections in connection 

with the proposed withdrawal extension 

may present their views in writing to 

the State Director at the address 

indicated above. 

Comments, including names and 

street addresses of respondents, will be 

available for public review at the 

address indicated above during regular 

business hours. 

Individual respondents may request 

confidentiality. Before including your 

address, phone number, e-mail address, 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, be 

advised 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 from 

public review your personal identifying 

information, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. If you wish to 

withhold your name or address from 

public review or from disclosure under 

the Freedom of Information Act, you 

must state this prominently at the 

beginning of your comments. Such 

requests will be honored to the extent 

allowed by law. All submissions from 

organizations or businesses, and from 

individuals identifying themselves as 

representatives or officials of 

organization or businesses, will be made 

available for public inspection in their 

entirety. 

Notice is hereby given that an 

opportunity for a public meeting is 

afforded in connection with the 

proposed withdrawal extension. All 

interested parties who desire a public 

meeting for the purpose of being heard 

on the proposed withdrawal must 

submit a written request to the State 

Director at the address indicated above 

within 90 days from the publication of 

this notice. Upon determination by the 

authorized officer that a public meeting 

will be held, a notice of the time and 

place will be published in the Federal 

Register at least 30 days before the 

scheduled date of the meeting. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
55130 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 24, 2008 / Notices 

1National Park Service. 1995. Report of Effects of 

Aircraft Overflights on the National Park System, 

Report to Congress, July. 

2United States Air Tour Association, et al., 

Petitioners v. Federal Aviation Administration, et 

al., Respondents; Grand Canyon Trust, et al., 

Intervenors, 353 U.S. App. D.C. 213; 298 F.3d. 997; 

2002. U.S. App. 

3National Park Service. 2001. Director’s Order 

#12 and Handbook: Conservation Planning, 

Environmental Impact Analysis and Decision 

Making, January. 

The application will be processed in 

accordance with the regulations set 

forth in 43 CFR part 2300. 

Fred O’Ferrall, 

Chief, Branch of Lands and Mineral 

Resources. 

[FR Doc. E8–22347 Filed 9–23–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Public Notice: Clarifying the Definition 

of ‘‘Substantial Restoration of Natural 

Quiet’’ at Grand Canyon National Park, 

AZ 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Disposition of Public 

Comments and Adoption of 

Clarification. 

SUMMARY: On April 9, 2008, the National 

Park Service (NPS) published a Public 

Notice of agency policy in the Federal 

Register with the above title (73 FR 

19246–19248), clarifying the NPS 

definition of substantial restoration of 

natural quiet at Grand Canyon National 

Park (GCNP) to distinguish between 

aircraft noise generated above and 

below 17,999 feet mean sea level (MSL), 

and requesting comments on the 

proposed clarification. Specifically, the 

NPS proposed the following 

clarification: 

(a) Substantial restoration of natural 

quiet at GCNP will be achieved when 

the reduction of noise from aircraft 

operations at or below 17,999 feet MSL 

results in 50% or more of the park 

achieving restoration of the natural 

quiet (i.e., no aircraft audible) for 75% 

to 100% of the day, each and every day; 

and 

(b) The NPS defines the substantial 

restoration of natural quiet from all 

aircraft above 17,999 feet MSL to mean 

that there will be an overall reduction 

in aviation noise generated above 17,999 

feet MSL above the park over time 

through implementation of measures in 

accordance with Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) commitments. 

The NPS also clarified that 50% of the 

park is a minimum in the restoration 

goal. 

The public comment period was open 

from April 9 to May 9, 2008. The NPS 

received and analyzed 127 comments in 

response to the Public Notice. 

Comments were received from the 

National Air Transportation 

Association; environmental groups (e.g., 

Sierra Club, Audubon Society, and 

Grand Canyon Trust); air tour operators; 

and the general public. Comments 

beyond the scope of this clarification 

may be considered in the development 

of the Environmental Impact Statement 

for Special Flight Rules in the Vicinity 

of Grand Canyon National Park (EIS). 

DATES: The clarification as published on 

April 9, 2008, is effective immediately. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken 

McMullen, Grand Canyon National 

Park, 823 N. San Francisco St., Suite B, 

Flagstaff, AZ 86001, Telephone (928) 

779–2095. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

In response to the comments received 

pursuant to the publication of the NPS 

Public Notice in the April 9, 2008 

Federal Register, the NPS explains the 

reasons for and the expected effects of 

the proposed clarification below and in 

the Discussion of Comments to follow. 

Reasons for the Clarification 

The notice published on April 9, 2008 

in the Federal Register clarifies the 

definition used by GCNP for achieving 

substantial restoration of natural quiet 

as mandated by the 1987 Overflights Act 

(Pub. L. 100–91) (Overflights Act). This 

clarification of the definition is 

necessary to address current aircraft 

noise impacts, to comply with the intent 

of recommendations provided in the 

1995 Report to Congress 1, and to 

respond to a 2002 U.S. Court of Appeals 

decision.2 The provisions of Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) 50– 

2 have not resulted in substantial 

restoration of natural quiet at GCNP. 

Given the volume of high altitude 

commercial jet and general aviation 

traffic overflying the Grand Canyon 

above 17,999 feet MSL, the substantial 

restoration goal as previously defined 

cannot be attained. 

Discussion of Comments 

The NPS received 127 comments 

regarding the clarification of the 

definition of the ‘‘substantial restoration 

of natural quiet’’ at GCNP. Of those, 40 

comments were substantive in nature 

while 87 were not substantive. NPS 

Directors Order 12, Conservation 

Planning, Environmental Impact 

Analysis, and Decision Making,3 defines 

substantive comments as those that 

raise, debate, or question a point of fact 

or policy. Comments solely in favor of 

or against the proposed action are not 

considered substantive. Also, a large 

number of comments were received that 

did not address the proposed 

clarification regarding 17,999 feet MSL; 

many addressed other issues that 

commentors said should be addressed 

in the EIS. While such comments are 

not substantive for this clarification, 

they will be considered as the EIS is 

developed. Substantive comments about 

the clarification are summarized and 

responded to below. 

1. One commentor suggested the 

addition of the word ‘‘such’’ for clarity, 

so that Part (a) would read: ‘‘Substantial 

restoration of natural quiet at GCNP is 

achieved when the reduction of noise 

from aircraft operations at or below 

17,999 feet MSL results in 50% or more 

of the park achieving restoration of 

natural quiet (i.e., no such aircraft 

audible) for 75% to 100% of the day 

* * *’’ 

NPS Response: The NPS believes that 

Part (a) of the clarification as stated in 

73 FR 19246–19248 is sufficiently clear 

to address only those aircraft at or below 

17,999 feet MSL. Therefore, the 

suggested change is not made. 

2. Comments were received urging 

NPS to clarify that Part (b) is not a 

definition of the statutory term, but 

rather policy goals based upon FAA 

commitments. Two commentors stated 

that the FAA commitments are alluded 

to but not specified. 

NPS Response: Part (b) of 73 FR 

19246–19248 clarifies but does not 

redefine the NPS goal for substantial 

restoration of natural quiet from all 

aircraft above 17,999 feet MSL above the 

park. This goal is supported by FAA 

policy commitments to: (1) Actively 

pursue efforts to continue to reduce 

aircraft source noise throughout the 

aviation system. The recently 

introduced NextGen Aviation Reform 

Act strengthens the FAA’s research and 

development capability and includes a 

performance objective for lower noise 

aircraft technology; (2) when the FAA is 

engaged in airspace redesign that affects 

a national park and there are alternative 

choices consistent with safety, 

operational, and environmental 

parameters, the FAA will give favorable 

consideration to alternative routes away 

from sensitive park resources; and, (3) 

as the FAA transitions to a more 

dynamic, satellite-based technology, 

future navigational flexibility will allow 

the FAA to reconsider opportunities to 

reduce national park overflights that are 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES