54378 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices 

(including armoring the base of the 

slope in lieu of road realignment 

options). The Scoping Report included 

comments and agency responses as 

appendices. On June 17, 2004, a notice 

was sent to the 302-member project 

mailing list regarding release of the 

Scoping Report; additionally, a press 

release was issued and a notice posted 

on the Park website announcing 

availability of the document. In April of 

2005, a newsletter was sent to the 

project mailing list summarizing 

progress on the DEIS to date, including 

the preliminary identification of a 

preferred alternative, completion of a 

Cultural Resource Survey and a Tunnel 

Feasibility Study, and plans for rare 

plant surveys. The project team made a 

presentation summarizing planning to 

date to the San Juan Board of County 

Commissioners in January, 2006; the 

meeting was open to the public. A plant 

survey report was also completed 

during January, 2006. Letters were sent 

to culturally affiliated tribes on March 9, 

2006, with copies of the Cultural 

Resource Survey and inviting their 

comments on the project. The FHWA, 

on behalf of the project team, sent a 

letter to the Washington State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) on May 28, 

2009, with a recommendation of No 

Adverse Effect and § 4(f) de minimis 

determination. Concurrence was 

received from the SHPO on June 23, 

2009. 

Proposal and Alternatives: Alternative 

A: No Action—The existing use, 

maintenance, and management 

associated with the road would 

continue without change. This 

alternative provides a baseline of 

current conditions to aid comparison 

and analysis of the ‘‘action’’ alternatives. 

Under this alternative, erosion 

eventually could cause the road to fail, 

disrupting vehicular access to 

residential properties in the Cattle Point 

Estates and Cape San Juan 

neighborhoods and to public lands east 

of the eroding bluff. Since 

measurements began in 2002, erosion 

has moved approximately 14 feet closer 

to the guard rail and is currently 32 feet 

from the guard rail at its closest point. 

The continued life span of the road is 

difficult to predict, however large storm 

events could potentially make the road 

unsafe in a few years—life expectancy 

(relative to coastal erosion) is estimated 

at approximately 100 years for each of 

the ‘‘action’’ alternatives. 

Alternative B: Hybrid Mid-Slope 

Realignment—This alternative is the 

‘‘agency preferred’’ alternative. It 

involves mid-slope realignment to the 

north of the existing road, traversing the 

south-facing slope of Mt. Finlayson. At 

its highest point, this alignment curves 

slightly south of the Mt. Finlayson 

summit. The realignment would be 

entirely on the surface (no tunnel), 

approximately 4,950 feet in length, with 

a short slope of 10.5% on the eastern 

end. This also is deemed to be the 

‘‘environmentally preferred’’ course of 

action. 

Alternative C: Long Tunnel on Minor 

Realignment—This alternative involves 

a short realignment (2,830 feet) 

relatively low on the slope of Mt. 

Finlayson. Sixteen hundred feet of the 

realignment would be within a bored 

tunnel. Maximum slope would be 7%. 

Alternative D: Mid-Slope Alignment 

with Short Tunnel—This alternative 

involves mid-slope realignment to the 

north of the existing road, utilizing a 

short tunnel near the ridgeline of Mt. 

Finlayson. Realignment length would be 

4,700 feet, 775 feet of which would be 

within the tunnel. Maximum slope 

would be 8%. 

Public Review and Comment: The 

DEIS is now available for public review. 

Copies may be obtained by contacting 

the Park as noted below. Printed copies 

of the document may also be reviewed 

at these locations in Friday Harbor on 

San Juan Island: San Juan County Public 

Library, San Juan County Office of 

Public Works, and at Park headquarters. 

The document may also be reviewed at 

Federal Highway Administration office 

in Vancouver, Washington. All written 

comments must be postmarked or 

transmitted not later than 60 days from 

the date of publication in the Federal 

Register of the Environmental 

Protection Agency’s notice of filing of 

the DEIS—as soon as this date is 

confirmed, it will be announced on the 

project website and via local and 

regional media. 

During the review period, several 

options are available for providing 

written comments. Letters can be 

directly mailed to: Superintendent Peter 

Dederich, San Juan Island National 

Historical Park, P.O. Box 429, Friday 

Harbor, WA 98250. In addition, 

comments may be hand-delivered at the 

upcoming public workshop to be 

conducted on San Juan Island. 

Confirmed details on the date, location, 

and time for the workshop will be 

announced in local newspapers, in the 

forthcoming DEIS Alternatives 

newsletter, online at the Park Web site 

(http://www.nps.gov/sajh), or may be 

obtained via telephone at (360) 378– 

2240. Comments may also be 

transmitted electronically on the NPS 

project Web site http// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/sajh. 

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. 

Following the opportunity to review 

the DEIS, all comments received will be 

duly considered in preparing a Final 

EIS. The Final EIS is expected to be 

completed during the spring of 2011 

and availability of the document will be 

similarly announced in the Federal 

Register and via local and regional press 

media. 

Dated: April 5, 2010. 

Cicely A. Muldoon, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22145 Filed 9–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement; 

Stehekin River Corridor 

Implementation Plan; Lake Chelan 

National Recreation Area; Whatcom, 

Skagit and Chelan Counties, WA; 

Notice of Availability 

Summary: Pursuant to § 102(2)(C) of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969, the National Park Service, in 

cooperation with the Federal Highway 

Administration, has prepared a Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement and 

Stehekin River Corridor Implementation 

Plan (Plan/DEIS). The Plan/DEIS 

evaluates four alternatives for 

sustainable management of NPS 

facilities (e.g., roads, maintenance yard, 

trails, bridges) in response to flooding 

and erosion issues on the lower 

Stehekin River between High Bridge and 

Lake Chelan, outside of the Stephen 

Mather Wilderness. When approved, the 

Plan will allow for implementation of 

several actions identified in the 1995 

General Management Plan (GMP), 

including removal of NPS maintenance 

and housing facilities and the primary 

access road to North Cascades National 

Park from the floodplain, construction 

of new recreation facilities, and 

protection of the water quality and 

scenery along the lower Stehekin River. 

The Plan/DEIS also updates the Lake 

Chelan National Recreation Area Land 

Protection Plan. 

Background: Lake Chelan National 

Recreation Area (LACH) encompasses 

62,000 acres of the rugged North 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices 54379 

Cascade mountains. The focal point of 

LACH is the Stehekin River, which 

occupies a deep glacial valley on the 

east slope of the range. The Stehekin 

River is known for being flood prone 

due to rapid runoff from steep, rocky 

slopes and the location of its headwaters 

on the wet Pacific Crest of the Cascade 

Range. The Lower Stehekin valley 

below High Bridge is particularly 

vulnerable to flood and erosion damage 

due to rapid decrease in stream energy 

as the river flows through a widening 

valley and empties into Lake Chelan. 

Several key National Park Service 

(NPS) facilities (fuel storage, 

maintenance shops, and housing), 

private development, and roads are in 

the floodplain of the lower Stehekin 

River and threatened by floods. Flood 

conditions have become exacerbated by 

a shift in the timing, magnitude, and 

frequency of flooding on the Stehekin 

River in the 1970s, away from smaller 

spring floods to larger fall floods. This 

shift has produced the three largest 

floods since 1911 in the past 15 years. 

Changes in the river channel have 

resulted in threats to water quality and 

scenery as several private cabins and 

their sanitary systems have been 

incorporated into the river. 

This plan seeks to implement and 

refine guidance from the 1995 GMP for 

LACH that identified a new location for 

administrative facilities outside of 

regulatory floodplains. Locations for 

expanded recreation opportunities 

outside of designated wilderness within 

the National Recreation Area were also 

identified in this plan. The 1995 LACH 

Land Protection Plan, scheduled to be 

updated every two years, is the primary 

means for the NPS to acquire private 

cabins and associated water and 

sanitary systems to prevent degradation 

of water quality and scenic resources. 

Given drastic changes in flood 

conditions, this plan was in need of 

revision. 

Passage of the record floods in 2003 

and 2006 led private landowners in the 

valley to request U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (COE) advice on how to 

reduce flooding. While the COE failed to 

secure funds to do a detailed five-year 

study, its emergency management team 

recommended extensive bank hardening 

with rock, and dredging of the river 

channel. Estimated one-time cost is $12 

million for removal of gravel deposited 

since 2000 at two mile-long sites near 

McGregor Meadows and the Stehekin 

River mouth. The NPS finds the COE 

recommendations to manipulate the 

river contrary to the purpose and 

significance of LACH. The potential for 

major action by another agency and 

continued placement of structures on 

the Stehekin River by the NPS to protect 

the road and private landowners to 

protect property create the need to 

assess cumulative impacts before new 

actions are considered. 

Surveys of channel topography (1972, 

1990, 2004 and 2008) and position 

(1959, 1962, 1978, 1982, 1995, 2004, 

2007, and 2009), measurement of gravel 

deposits (2007–08), hydrology data 

collected since 1911, and large wood 

surveys (conducted 1982, 2000, and 

2007) provide the basis for development 

of a scientifically credible plan and 

impact analysis. Potential solutions for 

all alternatives were reviewed by a 

technical committee composed of 

representatives for the Washington DOE 

and DFW, Chelan PUD, Chelan County 

Planning Department, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, and a private 

consultant. 

Public involvement in the 

conservation planning process began 

with widespread mailing of a scoping 

newsletter in early January 2008. Late in 

January 2008, meetings in Stehekin, 

Seattle, and Wenatchee provided an 

opportunity for the public to identify 

issues. Notice of Intent to prepare an 

environmental impact statement was 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 27, 2008. A news release for 

the public scoping meetings was sent in 

February 14, 2008, to local and regional 

news media (a follow up news release 

on March 5, 2008, extended public 

scoping to March 31). Following an NPS 

alternative development workshop in 

March 2008, a preliminary alternatives 

newsletter was developed and mailed to 

the public in summer 2008. This was 

followed-up by a public open house in 

Stehekin in August 2008. Both the 

newsletter and open house were 

announced via news releases to several 

media outlets, including local 

newspapers and radio and television 

stations. 

Purpose and Need for Federal Action: 

Recent major floods and resultant 

channel changes on the lower Stehekin 

River are threatening NPS facilities and 

natural resources within LACH. The 

three largest recorded floods on the 

Stehekin River have occurred within the 

past 15 years, and in response the NPS 

has spent more than $3 million to 

protect public roads and facilities and to 

repair flood damage since 2003. Roads, 

visitor facilities and private homes once 

thought to be safe from the river are now 

threatened. Because of the current 

impacts and future risks associated with 

these unprecedented conditions, the 

primary purpose of this implementation 

plan is to enable the NPS to meet goals 

and direction provided in the 1995 

GMP, including: 

(1) Sustainably operate and maintain 

NPS administrative facilities, public 

access (roads and trails), and 

campgrounds; (2) Protect water quality, 

scenic values, habitat, and natural 

processes of the Stehekin River; and (3) 

Ensure the persistence of visitor services 

provided by the Stehekin community, 

including those services and facilities 

found on private lands. 

The NPS and FHWA have identified 

a need to evaluate comprehensive and 

sustainable management strategies and 

holistic actions to address the 

consequences of flooding. This 

implementation plan is needed to 

address several interrelated issues, 

including the following: 

(1) Respond to the Increased 

Magnitude and Frequency of Flooding. 

Prior to the late 20th century, the 

Stehekin River was prone primarily to 

spring snowmelt flooding. Since the 

1970s, however, the Stehekin River has 

become prone to large fall rain-on-snow 

floods, which rise quickly and occur 

from mid-October through December. 

Hydrologic data collected on the river 

since 1911 confirm the statistical 

significance of this shift, as analyzed by 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The 

passage of severe floods in 1995, 2003, 

and 2006 has led to significant changes 

in the Stehekin River channel, and 

redefined the boundaries for the 100- 

year flood. As a result, recreational and 

administrative facilities and 

developments once thought to be safe 

from the river are now threatened by 

flooding and bank erosion, while other 

sites in the floodplain have been 

compromised by larger, more frequent 

floods. Until now, the NPS has 

addressed problems on a case-by-case 

basis throughout the valley with the 

passage of each of these large floods. 

(2) Implement and Clarify 1995 Lake 

Chelan National Recreation Area 

General Management Plan Guidance. 

The GMP provides broad management 

guidance for LACH, as well as some 

specific prescriptions to mitigate the 

risks and consequences of flooding. As 

a programmatic document, the GMP 

lacks the specific management direction 

needed to respond to the current 

circumstances imposed by the recent 

floods and the change to a fall flood 

regime. Specific actions called for in the 

GMP that would be implemented in this 

plan include relocation of the 

maintenance facility and new NPS 

housing out of the floodplain, and 

continued maintenance of vehicle 

access on the Stehekin Valley and 

Company Creek roads. This 

implementation plan is needed to 

inform the location, design, 

construction, and implementation of 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
54380 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices 

these actions. Guidance provided by the 

GMP needs to be updated and clarified 

to reflect the dramatic increase in 

woody debris since 1995 and 

recognition of the influence of Chelan 

Public Utility District on the level of 

Lake Chelan and the lower Stehekin 

River. This plan is also needed to 

evaluate and publicly disclose the 

direct, indirect and cumulative impacts 

of these actions on the resources and 

values of Lake Chelan NRA. 

(3) Sustain Public Facilities While 

Protecting Natural Resources. 

Management action is needed to provide 

long-term use and access to 

administrative and recreation facilities. 

Despite erosion protection and flood 

control efforts by the NPS and private 

landowners, bank erosion continues to 

threaten public and private property. 

Channel changes have increased the rate 

of erosion and frequency of flooding at 

some sites, while decreasing erosion 

rates at others. Integrated management 

actions such as facility relocation, sitespecific bank hardening, and limited 

manipulation of woody debris in the 

Lake Chelan backwater zone now need 

to be considered to ensure the long-term 

sustainability of infrastructure and 

protection of resources. Management of 

large wood and proliferation of bank 

protection measures have the potential 

to impact Federal and state listed 

species and to increase the spread of 

non-native plants. These conditions 

underscore the need for updated 

assessment of erosion and flood 

protection measures in the lower 

Stehekin Valley. 

(4) Manage Limited Funding. The NPS 

has invested more than $3 million to 

react to recent flood damage and new 

threats on an event-by-event basis since 

2003. A comprehensive and integrated 

set of strategies and tactics to meet the 

goals of the GMP and to mitigate the risk 

and impacts from flooding is urgently 

needed to enable the NPS to use limited 

funds for the maximum benefit of 

LACH. Without this comprehensive 

approach, the NPS may be compelled to 

continue reacting on a case-by-case 

basis, which is more expensive and 

could more adversely threaten natural 

resources and public safety. 

(5) Respond to Private Land-related 

Concerns. Lake Chelan NRA includes 

approximately 417 acres of private land, 

much of which lies within the 

floodplain and channel migration zone 

of the Stehekin River. Developments at 

McGregor Meadows and near the river 

mouth are particularly vulnerable 

because of their density and location in 

particularly active reaches of the river. 

These reaches, or sections of the river, 

have extensive new gravel deposits and 

rapidly growing logjams as a result of 

recent flooding. The high monetary and 

environmental costs of bank protection 

and flood mitigation measures continue 

to threaten private property and river 

resources. At the river mouth, 

accumulation of logs in the backwater 

zone of Lake Chelan has led to deeper 

flood water in parts of the floodplain. 

Recent flooding has hastened channel 

migration; damaged or destroyed several 

cabins; incorporated debris and sanitary 

systems (and occasional limited effluent 

discharges) into the river; and increased 

the flood risk to private lands 

previously not threatened by flooding. 

The NPS is concerned that these nonFederal circumstances could continue to 

adversely affect LACH and Stehekin 

River natural resources and values. The 

primary means by which the NPS can 

address this concern is via the Land 

Protection Plan (LPP), which identifies 

and prioritizes private lands for 

acquisition or exchange from willing 

sellers. Last updated in 1995, the LPP 

needs to be amended to address new 

river channel and floodplain conditions. 

Proposed Plan and Alternatives: The 

Plan/DEIS describes and analyzes three 

‘‘action’’ alternatives, as well as 

continuation of current management. 

The three alternative management 

strategies differ primarily because they 

range from more removal of public 

facilities and threatened private 

developments from the channel 

migration zone (preferred Alternative 2) 

to less relocation and more dependence 

on bank hardening and maintaining the 

road in place (Alternative 4). Alternative 

three represents a mix of actions in 

Alternatives 2 and 4. 

All of the alternatives have common 

actions identified in the GMP, including 

relocation of NPS maintenance and 

some housing out of the channel 

migration zone, resurfacing of the road 

from Harlequin Bridge to mile 9.2 (just 

above Stehekin valley Ranch), and 

construction of a new trail system from 

Stehekin Landing to High Bridge with a 

connection to the river trail via a 

footbridge over the river near the USGS 

gage site. Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would 

add new campsites at different locations 

to supplement sites at Harlequin Bridge 

that are seasonally flooded. 

Alternative 1 (continue current 

management) and Alternative 4 would 

keep the Stehekin valley road in place 

through McGregor Meadows. To protect 

the road from flood damage and to 

ensure access to private residences for 

emergencies during floods, about 6,000 

cubic yards of fill would be placed in 

the floodplain. In Alternative 4, as many 

as 17 new rock barbs (rock structures 

used to redirect flows) would be placed 

along the river, with a similar number 

anticipated over time in Alternative 1. 

Alternatives 2 and 3 would relocate 

1.9 miles of the Stehekin valley road 

from the floodplain in McGregor 

Meadows, while retaining private access 

to the area via a 0.75 mile long reduced 

maintenance road at grade. The 

alternatives differ in where the reroute 

returns to the existing road, with 

Alternative 2 staying out of the channel 

migration zone (CMZ) and Alternative 3 

re-entering the CMZ at the Lower Field. 

Implementation of Alternative 2 would 

result in closure of the shooting range 

near the Lower Field. Both Alternatives 

2 and 3 reduce the number of barbs in 

the river relative to alternatives 1 and 4 

(7–8 new barbs in Alternative 2 and four 

new barbs in Alternative 3). 

Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 would revise 

the LACH Land Protection Plan (LPP). 

Alternatives 2 and 3 would focus more 

on acquisition of private development 

threatened by the river, and look to 

cluster future development on areas 

outside of the channel migration zone. 

This represents a departure from the 

1995 LPP, which placed a higher value 

on scenic resources along the Stehekin 

valley road. In Alternative 4, less 

emphasis would be placed on 

acquisition of development in the 

floodplain, and far fewer private parcels 

would be high priority for purchase or 

exchange. 

Comments: All written comments 

must be postmarked or transmitted not 

later than December 13, 2010 (this end 

of comment period date will also be 

posted on the project Web site, and 

announced via local and regional press 

media). All comments should be 

addressed to: Superintendent, ATTN: 

SRCIP/DEIS, North Cascades National 

Park Service Complex, 810 State Route 

20, Sedro Woolley, WA 98284. 

Comments may also be faxed to (360) 

856–1934 or may be transmitted 

electronically to http:// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/noca. The Plan/ 

DEIS will be mailed directly to all those 

who requested a copy during public 

scoping. Review copies will also be 

available at park headquarters in SedroWoolley, the main visitor center in 

Newhalem, and at the Golden West 

Visitor center in Stehekin. To request a 

printed copy or CD–ROM version of the 

DEIS, phone (360) 856–5700 ext. 351. 

The document will also be available for 

downloading on the project Web site. 

All comments received will be 

maintained in the administrative record, 

and are available for review at North 

Cascades’ headquarters. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

e-mail address, or other personal 

identifying information in your 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 172 / Tuesday, September 7, 2010 / Notices 54381 

comments, 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. 

To enhance the opportunity for public 

information and commenting, public 

meetings will be hosted at the following 

Washington locations: October 19 in 

Stehekin, October 20 in Wenatchee, and 

October 21 Seattle. Confirmed meeting 

times, specific locations and other 

details will be announced via local and 

regional news media and may be 

obtained on the park’s Web site (http:// 

www.nps.gov/noca) or by phoning (360) 

856–5700 ext.351. Participants are 

strongly encouraged to review the 

document prior to attending a meeting. 

The Superintendent and planning team 

members, including personnel from the 

Technical Committee will attend all 

meetings. The format will be the same 

for each meeting, and will include a 

brief presentation on the essential 

elements of the Plan/DEIS and a 

question and answer period. Oral and 

written comments may also be 

submitted. All meeting locations will be 

accessible for disabled persons. A sign 

language interpreter may be available 

upon request with prior notice (please 

contact the park as noted above). 

Decision: Following due 

consideration of all comments received 

on the DEIS, preparation and release of 

the Final EIS/Stehekin River Corridor 

Implementation Plan is anticipated for 

late summer 2010; availability will be 

similarly announced in the Federal 

Register. The actual date will depend 

upon the degree of public interest and 

response from agencies and 

organizations. Following a minimum 30 

days ‘‘no action’’ period, a Record of 

Decision may be prepared; approval of 

the plan will be similarly announced in 

the Federal Register. This is tentatively 

anticipated for late 2010. As a delegated 

EIS the official responsible for the final 

decision is the Regional Director, Pacific 

West Region; subsequently the official 

responsible for implementation of the 

approved Stehekin River Corridor 

Implementation Plan is the 

Superintendent, North Cascades 

National Park Service Complex. 

Dated: March 12, 2010. 

Patricia L. Neubacher, 

Acting Regional Director, Pacific West Region. 

Editorial Note: This document was 

received in the Office of the Federal Register 

on August 31, 2010. 

[FR Doc. 2010–22144 Filed 9–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–T6–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R6–R–2010–N078; 60138–1261– 

6CCP–S3] 

Charles M. Russell National Wildlife 

Refuge and UL Bend National Wildlife 

Refuge, MT 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability: Draft 

comprehensive conservation plan and 

draft environmental impact statement; 

announcement of public meetings; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a draft comprehensive 

conservation plan (CCP) and draft 

environmental impact statement (DEIS) 

for Charles M. Russell and UL Bend 

National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs, 

Refuges) in Montana for public review 

and comment. In these documents, we 

describe alternatives, including our 

proposed action, to manage these 

refuges for the 15 years following 

approval of the final CCP. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments by 

November 8, 2010. We will announce 

upcoming public meetings in local news 

media, on our Web site, and by mail. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

comments or a request for copies (hard 

copies or a CD–ROM) or more 

information by any of the following 

methods: 

Agency Web site: Download a copy of 

the documents at http://www.fws.gov/ 

cmr/planning. 

E-mail: cmrplanning@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘Request copy of Charles M. Russell 

NWR Draft CCP/EIS’’ in the subject line 

of the message. 

Mail: Charles M. Russell NWR CCP/ 

EIS, P.O. Box 110, Lewistown, MT 

59457. 

In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call 

(406) 538–8706 to make an appointment 

during regular business hours at Charles 

M. Russell NWR Headquarters, Airport 

Road, Lewistown, MT 59457. 

Local Library or Libraries: The draft 

documents are available for review at 

the libraries listed under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Barron Crawford, Project Leader, at 

(406) 538–8706, or Laurie Shannon, 

Planning Team Leader, (303) 236–4317; 

laurie_shannon@fws.gov (e-mail). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we continue the CCP 

process for Charles M. Russell and UL 

Bend NWRs. We started this process 

through a notice in the Federal Register 

(72 FR 68174, December 4, 2007). 

Charles M. Russell and UL Bend 

NWRs encompass nearly 1.1 million 

acres, including Fort Peck Reservoir in 

north central Montana. The Refuges 

extend about 125 air miles west from 

Fort Peck Dam to the western edge at 

the boundary of the Upper Missouri 

Breaks National Monument. UL Bend 

NWR lies within Charles M. Russell 

NWR. In essence, UL Bend is a refuge 

within a refuge, and the two refuges are 

managed as one unit and referred to as 

Charles M. Russell NWR. Refuge habitat 

includes native prairie, forested coulees, 

river bottoms, and badlands. Wildlife is 

as diverse as the topography and 

includes Rocky Mountain elk, mule 

deer, white-tailed deer, pronghorn, 

Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep, sharptailed grouse, prairie dogs, and more 

than 236 species of birds. 

Background 

The CCP Process 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee) (Administration Act), as 

amended by the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 

1997, requires us to develop a CCP for 

each national wildlife refuge. The 

purpose for 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, which 

is 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 wildlife-dependent recreational 

opportunities available to the public, 

including opportunities for hunting, 

fishing, wildlife observation and 

photography, and environmental 

education and interpretation. We will 

review and update the CCP at least 

every 15 years in accordance with the 

Administration Act. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1