Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69519 

asbestos; lead-based paint; mold possible; 

contact GSA for more information. 

Maryland 

Carroll County Memorial USA RC 

404 Malcolm Drive 

Westminster MD 21157 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201430003 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 4–DMD–1130AA 

Directions: Landholding agency; Army; 

Disposal Agency; GSA 

Comments: 3 Building totaling 15,719 sq. ft., 

storage/maintenance good conditions; 

asbestos/lead-based paint/polychlorinated 

biphenyl; remediation required; contact 

GSA for more information. 

Michigan 

Nat’l Weather Svc Ofc 

214 West 14th Ave. 

Sault Ste. Marie MI 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54200120010 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 1–C–MI–802 

Comments: 2230 sq. ft., presence of asbestos, 

most recent use—office. 

Texas 

2 Buildings; Natural Resource Conservation 

Service Waco Facility 

200 South Price Street 

Waco TX 76501 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201430007 

Status: Surplus 

GSA Number: 7–A–TX–0556 

Directions: Landholding agency; Agriculture; 

Disposal Agency; GSA. 

Comments: 18,460 sq. ft.; storage; 60+ 

months vacant; very poor condition; within 

a security fence; contact GSA for more 

information. 

Virginia 

Johnson House and Shed 

12503 Cavalry Court 

Spotsylvania VA 22553 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201430005 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 4–I–VA–1145AA 

Directions: Landholding Agency; Interior; 

Disposal Agency; GSA 

Comments: Off-site removal only; 1,357 +/¥ 

sq. ft.; repairs needed; contact GSA for 

more information. 

Washington 

Old Colville Border Patrol 

209 E. Juniper Ave. 

Colville WA 99114 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201420009 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 9–Z–WA–1272 

Directions: Landholding Agency: Dept. of 

Homeland Security; Disposal Agency: GSA 

Comments: 5,500 sq. ft.; office; 18+ months 

vacant; good to moderate conditions; 

contact GSA for more info. 

Old Oroville Border Patrol Station 

1105 Main St. 

Oroville WA 98844 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201420010 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 9–Z–WA–1272–AB 

Directions: Landholding Agency: Dept. of 

Homeland Security; Disposal Agency: GSA 

Comments: 5,500 sq. ft.; office; 18+ months 

vacant; good to moderate conditions; 

contact GSA for more info. 

Wisconsin 

St. Croix National Scenic Riverway 

Residential Structures 

401 N. Hamilton St. 

St. Croix Falls WI 54204 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201430001 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 1–I–WI–541B 

Directions: Landholding Agency: Interior; 

Disposal Agency: GSA 

Comments: House #1: 1,048 sq. ft.; House #2: 

2,376 sq. ft.; House #3: 2,936 sq. ft.; good 

to fair conditions; LBP; contact GSA for 

more information. 

Land 

Missouri 

Former Nike Battery Site 

Kansas City 30 

15616 S KK Highway 

Pleasant Hill MO 64080 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201430002 

Status: Surplus 

GSA Number: 7–D–MO–0522 

Comments: 19.52 acres +/¥ and 4.02 

easement acres +/¥; education use; contact 

GCA for more information. 

South Carolina 

Former FAA Outer Marker Facility—Greer 

Brookfield Parkway 

Greer SC 29651 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201410011 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 1–U–SC–0631 

Comments: 0.99 acres; contact GSA for more 

information. 

Tennessee 

Former FAA Outer Marker Facility— 

Nashville 

W End of Kinhawk Drive 

Nashville TN 37211 

Landholding Agency: GSA 

Property Number: 54201410012 

Status: Excess 

GSA Number: 1–U–TN–0672 

Comments: 12.20 acres; contact GSA for more 

information. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27321 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R5–R–2014–N199; BAC–4311–K9–S3] 

Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, 

Morris County, New Jersey; Final 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of the final comprehensive 

conservation plan (CCP) and finding of 

no significant impact (FONSI) for Great 

Swamp National Wildlife Refuge 

(NWR), located in Morris County, New 

Jersey, for public review and comment. 

In this final CCP, we describe how we 

will manage the refuge for the next 15 

years. 

ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain 

copies of the final CCP and FONSI by 

any of the following methods. You may 

request a hard copy or a CD–ROM. 

Agency Web site: Download a copy of 

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

refuge/Great_Swamp/what_we_do/

conservation.html. 

Email: Send requests to 

northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘Great Swamp CCP’’ in the subject line 

of your email. 

Mail: Bill Perry, Natural Resource 

Planner, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 

01035. 

Fax: Attention: Bill Perry, 413–253– 

8468. 

In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call 

973–425–1222 to make an appointment 

(necessary for view/pickup only) during 

regular business hours at Great Swamp 

NWR, 241 Pleasant Plains Road, Basking 

Ridge, NJ 07920. For more information 

on locations for viewing or obtaining 

documents, see ‘‘Public Availability of 

Documents’’ under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Henry, Acting Refuge Manager, 

973–425–1222 (phone), or Bill Perry, 

Planning Team Leader, 413–253–8688 

(phone); northeastplanning@fws.gov 

(email). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

With this notice, we finalize the CCP 

process for Great Swamp NWR. We 

started this process through a notice in 

the Federal Register (75 FR 41879) on 

July 19, 2010. 

Great Swamp NWR was established 

by an act of Congress on November 3, 

1960, and formally dedicated in 1964, 

primarily under the authorities of the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16 

U.S.C. 703–711) and the Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act of 1929 (U.S.C. 715– 

715s, 45 Stat. 1222) as amended, ‘‘for 

use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any 

other management purpose, for 

migratory birds.’’ The refuge currently 

encompasses 7,768 acres and has an 

approved acquisition boundary that 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

69520 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 

would allow for refuge expansion to a 

maximum of 9,429 acres. Great Swamp 

NWR is located approximately 26 miles 

from New York City and is an area that 

is heavily suburbanized. The refuge 

provides vital brooding, nesting, 

feeding, and resting habitat for a variety 

of migratory bird species, including 

waterfowl. Although established 

primarily for migratory birds, the 

refuge’s mosaic of forested wetlands, 

emergent wetlands, and various 

successional stages of upland vegetation 

provides habitats for a diversity of 

wildlife species. 

We announce our decision and the 

availability of the FONSI for the final 

CCP for Great Swamp NWR in 

accordance with National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requirements. We 

completed a thorough analysis of 

impacts on the human environment, 

which we included in the draft CCP/

environmental assessment (EA). 

The CCP will guide us in managing 

and administering Great Swamp NWR 

for the next 15 years. Alternative B, as 

described for the refuge in the draft 

CCP/EA, and with minor modifications 

described below, is the foundation for 

the final CCP. 

Background 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

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

668dd–668ee) (Refuge Administration 

Act), as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, requires us to develop a 

CCP for each refuge. The purpose for 

developing a CCP is to provide refuge 

managers with a 15-year plan for 

achieving refuge purposes and 

contributing to the mission of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System 

(NWRS), 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, 

and environmental education and 

interpretation. We will review and 

update the CCP at least every 15 years 

in accordance with the Refuge 

Administration Act. 

CCP Alternatives, Including the 

Selected Alternative 

Our draft CCP/EA (79 FR 27634) 

addressed several key issues, including: 

• Evaluation of consolidating 

managed habitats of the refuge. 

• Better understanding the 

implications and trade-offs of habitat 

management on refuge wildlife. 

• Identifying and addressing climate 

change concerns impacting the refuge. 

• Providing more public use 

opportunities on the refuge and linking 

to nearby urban populations. 

• Providing additional hunting 

opportunities, including fall archery 

deer hunting and spring turkey hunting. 

• Expanding and strengthening 

partnerships. 

To address these issues and develop 

a plan based on the refuge’s establishing 

purposes, vision, and goals, we 

evaluated four management alternatives 

for Great Swamp NWR in the draft CCP/ 

EA. The alternatives have several 

actions in common. All alternatives 

include measures to control invasive 

species, monitor and abate diseases 

affecting wildlife and plant health, 

protect cultural resources, continue 

existing projects managed by outside 

programs, and manage threatened and 

endangered species populations on the 

refuge. There are other actions that 

differ among the alternatives. The draft 

CCP/EA provides a full description of 

each alternative and relates each to the 

issues and concerns that arose during 

the planning process. Below, we 

provide summaries of the four 

alternatives. 

Management Alternatives 

Alternative A (Current Management) 

Alternative A (current management) 

satisfies the NEPA (40 CFR 1506.6(b)) 

requirement of a ‘‘no action’’ alternative, 

which we define as ‘‘continuing current 

management.’’ It describes our existing 

management priorities and activities, 

and serves as a baseline for comparing 

and contrasting alternatives B, C, and D. 

It would maintain our present levels of 

approved refuge staffing and the 

biological and visitor programs now in 

place. We would continue to manage for 

and maintain a diversity of habitats, 

including freshwater wetlands, 

impoundments, scrub-shrub, grasslands, 

wet meadows, and forests on the refuge. 

The refuge would continue to provide 

an active visitor use program that 

supports environmental education and 

interpretation, hunting, fishing, and 

wildlife observation and photography. 

Alternative B (Enhance Biological 

Diversity and Public Use Opportunities) 

This alternative is the Servicepreferred alternative. It combines the 

actions we believe would most 

effectively achieve the refuge’s 

purposes, vision, and goals, and 

respond to the issues raised during the 

scoping period. This alternative 

emphasizes management of specific 

refuge habitats to support viable 

populations of focal species whose 

habitat needs benefit other species, 

especially those of conservation 

concern. We would continue to 

maintain a diversity of forest, nonforested, open water, grassland, and 

scrub-shrub habitats. However, habitats 

would be reconfigured and maintained 

to create large (greater than 50 acres) 

contiguous patches to promote wildlife 

use, increase connectivity, decrease 

fragmentation, and increase 

maintenance efficiency and reduce 

associated costs. This alternative 

emphasizes habitat for priority bird 

species and federally listed species, 

including the bog turtle and Indiana bat. 

This alternative would also enhance 

the refuge’s public use opportunities, 

and place more emphasis on connecting 

with communities in nearby urban 

areas. It would expand the hunt 

program by pursuing the processes for 

permitting archery for deer and opening 

the refuge to turkey hunting. It would 

also improve wildlife viewing and 

photography opportunities in a variety 

of habitats, expand visitor center hours, 

and increase the number of 

environmental education and 

interpretation programs on- and offrefuge. It attempts to balance public use 

with resource protection. 

Alternative C (Emphasis on Maximizing 

Natural Regeneration) 

Alternative C emphasizes allowing 

natural succession or regeneration to 

occur to the maximum extent practical. 

We would maximize core forest habitats 

while maintaining large (i.e., greater 

than 50 acres) contiguous patches of 

actively managed grasslands and scrubshrub habitats. This alternative would 

guide management to restore, where 

practical, the distribution of natural 

communities of the Great Swamp that 

would have resulted from natural 

processes without the influence of 

human settlement or management 

intervention. This alternative recognizes 

that refuge habitats and wildlife 

populations are not ecologically 

independent from the surrounding 

landscape, and that by taking a longterm regional perspective, the refuge can 

best contribute to higher conservation 

priorities at greater scales. This 

alternative continues to provide actively 

managed habitats in select areas to 

maintain wildlife viewing and 

photography opportunities for refuge 

visitors, as well as vital habitat for the 

refuge’s species of conservation 

concern. Although some open water 

habitat would be eliminated, the refuge 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 225 / Friday, November 21, 2014 / Notices 69521 

would continue to maintain open water 

habitat for waterfowl use. Under this 

alternative, the public use program 

would be similar to alternative A; 

however, under this alternative, we 

would eliminate less used or dead-end 

trails in the wilderness area. 

Alternative D (Focus on Expansion of 

Priority Public Uses) 

Alternative D emphasizes expanding 

wildlife-dependent priority public uses 

on the refuge. Public use and access 

would be maximized to the greatest 

extent practical, while minimizing 

impacts to wildlife. We would expand 

refuge infrastructure, including 

construction of new trails, observation 

towers, signage, and parking lots; 

expand hunting; and allow fishing in 

select areas of the refuge. This 

alternative would maximize public 

outreach, enhance and develop new 

environmental interpretation and 

education programs, aggressively 

expand partnerships, and increase staff 

presence at programs and events. In 

general, refuge habitats would be 

managed similarly to alternative B; 

however, this alternative would increase 

open water habitat to improve public 

viewing opportunities. 

Comments 

We solicited comments on the draft 

CCP/EA from May 14 to June 30, 2014 

(79 FR 27634). During the comment 

period, we received 80 written 

responses. We evaluated all of the 

substantive comments we received, and 

include a summary of those comments, 

and our responses to them, as appendix 

G in the final CCP. 

Selected Alternative 

After considering the comments we 

received on our draft CCP/EA, we made 

minor changes to alternative B, 

including not moving forward on the 

proposed parking area and wildlife 

observation opportunity on White 

Bridge Road, and correcting minor 

editorial, formatting, and typographical 

errors. These changes are described in 

the FONSI (appendix E in the final CCP) 

and in our response to public comments 

(appendix G in the final CCP). 

We have selected alternative B to 

implement for Great Swamp NWR, with 

these minor changes, for several 

reasons. Alternative B comprises a mix 

of actions that, in our professional 

judgment, work best towards achieving 

the refuge’s purposes, vision, and goals, 

NWRS policies, and the goals of other 

State and Regional conservation plans. 

We also believe that alternative B most 

effectively addresses key issues raised 

during the planning process. The basis 

of our decision is detailed in the FONSI 

(appendix E in the final CCP). 

Public Availability of Documents 

You can view or obtain the final CCP, 

including the FONSI, as indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

Dated: October 6, 2014. 

Deborah Rocque, 

Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27590 Filed 11–20–14; 8:45 a.m.] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

[AAK6006201 134A2100DD 

AOR3B30.999900] 

Intent To Prepare a Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Proposed Integrated Resource 

Management Plan for the Colville 

Reservation in Okanogan and Ferry 

Counties, WA 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This notice advises the public 

that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), 

in cooperation with the Confederated 

Tribes of the Colville Reservation 

(Tribes), intends to gather information 

necessary to prepare a programmatic 

environmental impact statement 

(Programmatic EIS) for the proposed 

Integrated Resource Management Plan 

(IRMP) for the Colville Reservation in 

Okanogan and Ferry Counties, 

Washington. This notice also announces 

public scoping meetings to identify 

potential issues and content for 

inclusion in the Programmatic EIS. 

DATES: The dates and locations of public 

scoping meetings will be published in 

the Omak-Okanogan County Chronicle, 

the Statesman Examiner, the Star, and 

the Tribal Tribune. Additional 

information will also be posted at the 

Tribes’ Web site: 

www.colvilletribes.com. Written 

comments must arrive within 30 days 

following the public scoping meetings. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be 

submitted by mail, email, hand carry or 

fax to: Dr. BJ Howerton, Environmental 

Services Manager, BIA Northwest 

Regional Office, 911 NE 11th Avenue, 

Portland, OR 97232–4169, Phone: (503) 

231–6749, Fax: (503) 231–2275, Email: 

bj.howerton@bia.gov; or Debra Wulff, 

BIA Superintendent, Colville Agency, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, P.O. Box 111, 

Nespelem, WA 99155–0111, Phone: 

(509) 634–2316, Fax: (509) 634–2355, 

Email: debra.wulff@bia.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

BJ Howerton at (503) 231–6749 or 

bj.howerton@bia.gov or Debra Wulff at 

(509) 634–2316 or debra.wulff@bia.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

proposed action is the preparation of an 

IRMP for the Colville Reservation and 

the BIA approval of long-term natural 

resource planning goals and objectives 

for the Colville Reservation. The Tribes 

may use the Programmatic EIS for 

tiered, project-specific environmental 

assessments to cover specific actions as 

the IRMP is implemented. 

The Tribes have managed their 

natural resources under the goals and 

objectives of an IRMP from 2000 to 

2014. The new IRMP will replace the 

expiring plan. The Programmatic EIS 

will consider a proposed strategy in the 

IRMP that enhances the existing plan, 

where timber harvesting and livestock 

grazing levels remain at the existing 

levels with improved scheduling based 

on more accurate mapping data, open 

ground modeling and current forest 

inventory data. The strategy would 

include improved management 

practices to reduce erosion from forest 

roads, increase enforcement of livestock 

rotation requirements, and provide a 

formal project review process to ensure 

compliance with the IRMP and tribal 

resource codes. 

Other alternative forest management 

strategies to be considered include: (1) 

A forest restoration strategy to 

emphasize thinning through the forest 

to return to historic conditions with a 

reduced harvest level, (2) an accelerated 

harvest strategy intended to maximize 

revenue to the Tribes, and (3) a No 

Forest Management strategy that would 

end timber harvesting. 

Rangeland management alternatives 

include: (1) A strategy to rest and rotate 

range units on a yearly basis, (2) a 

strategy to increase livestock grazing by 

allowing additional grazing by offreservation cattle ranchers, and (3) a 

strategy to eliminate livestock grazing 

altogether. 

No Action or continuation of the 

current IRMP goals and objectives will 

also be considered along with any 

additional strategies or alternatives that 

may be developed as a result of public 

scoping. 

Significant issues to be covered 

during the scoping process may include, 

but will not be limited to air quality, 

geology and soils, surface and 

groundwater resources, wildlife habitat, 

threatened and endangered species, 

cultural resources, socioeconomic 

conditions, land use, aesthetics, and 

Indian trust resources. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES