Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices 36251 

Next Steps 

We will consider the comments we 

receive during the current comment 

period and the comments we received 

during the earlier stages of the planning 

process, and address them in the final 

CCP and decision document. 

Public Availability of Comments 

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. 

Dated: June 8, 2009. 

David J. Wesley, 

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, 

Oregon. 

[FR Doc. E9–17145 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

General Management Plan, 

Environmental Impact Statement, 

Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania 

National Military Park, Virginia 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a 

General Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement, 

Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania 

National Military Park. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102 (2)(C) 

of the National Environmental Policy 

Act (NEPA) of 1969, the National Park 

Service is preparing a General 

Management Plan and Environmental 

Impact Statement (GMP/EIS) for the 

Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania 

National Military Park (FSNMP). The 

park comprises approximately 8,382 

acres, in the commonwealth of Virginia, 

in the city of Fredericksburg, and in the 

counties of Spotsylvania, Stafford, 

Orange, and Caroline. 

Prepared by park staff and planners in 

the NPS Northeast Region, with 

assistance from advisors and 

consultants, the GMP/EIS will propose 

a long-term approach to managing the 

FSNMP. Consistent with the park’s 

purpose, NPS policy, and other laws 

and regulations, alternatives will be 

developed to guide the management of 

the park over the next 15 to 20 years. 

The GMP/EIS will address a range of 

management alternatives for natural and 

cultural resource protection, visitor use 

and interpretation, park carrying 

capacity, facilities development and 

operations. A ‘‘no action’’ alternative 

will also be considered and an agency 

preferred management alternative 

identified. The alternatives will 

incorporate various zoning and 

management prescriptions to ensure 

resource preservation and public 

appreciation of the park. The 

environmental consequences that could 

result from implementing the various 

alternatives will be evaluated for 

cultural and natural resources, visitor 

experience, park operations, and the 

socioeconomic environment. Major 

issues to be explored include: measures 

for the preservation of resources; 

indications of the types and general 

intensities of development; 

identification of, and implementation 

commitments for, visitor carrying 

capacities; and indications of potential 

boundary modifications. 

Meeting Notices: The public is invited 

to express views, issues and concerns 

about the long-term management of 

FSNMP early in the process through 

public meetings and other media; and 

will have an opportunity to review and 

comment on a draft GMP/EIS. Public 

scoping meetings will be scheduled and 

consist of a discussion of the GMP/EIS 

process including ways that the public 

can be involved in providing and 

receiving information, and reviewing 

and commenting upon the draft GMP/ 

EIS. The place and time of public 

scoping meetings will be announced by 

the NPS and noticed in local 

newspapers serving the area. Scoping 

and other periodic public meeting 

notices and information regarding the 

GMP/EIS will also be placed on the NPS 

Planning, Environment and Public 

Comment (PEPC) Web site (http:// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/frsp) for 

continuing public review and comment. 

ADDRESSES: Information related to 

ongoing public involvement 

opportunities will be provided online at 

the FSNMP Web site (http:// 

www.nps.gov/frsp) and on the NPS 

PEPC Web site (http:// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/frsp). Requests to 

be added to the project mailing list may 

be made electronically through the NPS 

PEPC Web site or by directing requests 

to the contacts listed below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Russ 

Smith, Superintendent, Fredericksburg 

and Spotsylvania National Military 

Park, 120 Chatham Lane, 

Fredericksburg, VA 22405–2508, 

Telephone: 540–371–0802. 

Megan Lang, Community Planner/ 

Project Manager, National Park Service, 

Park Planning and Special Studies, 200 

Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 

19106, Telephone: 215–597–8875. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If you 

wish to comment on the GMP/EIS, you 

may submit your comments by any one 

of several methods. You may mail 

comments to contacts listed above or 

you may submit comments 

electronically through the NPS PEPC 

Web site (http://parkplanning.nps.gov/ 

frsp). 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. 

Michael T. Reynolds, 

Deputy Regional Director, Northeast Region, 

National Park Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–17375 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–77–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Final General Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement, 

Governors Island National Monument, 

New York, NY 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability of a 

Record of Decision on the Final General 

Management Plan and Environmental 

Impact Statement for Governors Island 

National Monument. 

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

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969, as amended, the National Park 

Service (NPS) announces the 

availability of the Record of Decision for 

the Final General Management Plan and 

Environmental Impact Statement (GMP/ 

EIS) for Governors Island National 

Monument, New York. On June 1, 2009, 

the Regional Director, Northeast Region, 

approved the Record of Decision for the 

GMP/EIS, selecting Alternative D, The 

Harbor Center, which was described as 

the preferred alternative in the Final 

GMP/EIS issued on April 26, 2009. As 

soon as practicable, the NPS will begin 

to implement the selected alternative. 

The National Monument will be 

developed as a Harbor Center with 

partners as a hub of activities and a 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
36252 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices 

jumping-off point for visitors exploring 

New York Harbor. This course of action 

and three other alternatives were 

presented and analyzed in the Draft and 

Final Environmental Impact Statements. 

The full range of foreseeable 

environmental consequences was 

assessed, and appropriate mitigating 

measures were identified. 

Copies of the Record of Decision may 

be obtained from the contact listed 

below or online at the NPS Planning, 

Environment and Public Comment 

(PEPC) Web site (http:// 

parkplanning.nps.gov/gois). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patti 

Reilly, Superintendent, Governors 

Island National Monument, Battery 

Maritime Building, Slip 7, 10 South 

Street, New York, NY 10004, 212–825– 

3040. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NPS 

selected alternative develops Governors 

Island National Monument as the 

Harbor Center—a hub of activities and 

jumping-off point for visitors wanting to 

explore New York Harbor. 

Working with other harbor-related 

organizations—national parks and local, 

regional, national and international 

civic, educational and research 

organizations—the NPS would develop 

a range of activities in Fort Jay and 

Castle Williams that interpret the key 

themes of the island and greater harbor. 

The park would collaborate and 

coordinate on harbor–related programs 

on and off Governors Island that would 

help visitors understand the forts’ 

military significance, the island’s 

strategic location, and the ongoing 

ecological conservation efforts for the 

harbor and the re-visioning and 

redevelopment of the waterfront. 

Governors Island National Monument 

would become a primary stop on harbor 

ferry tours. Programs would include 

specialized boat tours of the harbor, 

educational programs that explore the 

harbor’s history and ecology. 

A variety of programs, exhibits, and 

special events would be available in 

both forts. These activities would use 

the harbor to describe the island’s 

history and significance, and the 

interplay over time between the harbor 

and the city’s health and economy. 

Fort Jay would house harbor research, 

offices and temporary lodging for NPS 

sponsored fellowship and residency 

programs; and be the setting for harbor 

related seminars and workshops. 

Castle Williams would be the island’s 

main exhibit and interpretive center, 

showcasing multimedia programs and 

interactive exhibits that explore local, 

national, and global topics associated 

with Governors Island and New York 

Harbor. 

The selected alternative would seek to 

accomplish the following broad goals: 

• Preserve the National Monument’s 

historic resources for the enjoyment of 

present and future generations. 

Management would make historic 

preservation of Fort Jay and Castle 

Williams its highest priority. 

• Offer visitors multiple and varied 

opportunities to explore and understand 

the National Monument. Public access 

to the National Monument would be 

convenient and affordable. Dock 102 

would have a new contact station which 

would serve as an information and 

orientation center; Building 140 would 

continue to be another welcoming 

center with a bookstore. 

• Operate the National Monument as 

part of the larger island. The NPS would 

cooperate with organizations, including 

Governor’s Island Education and 

Preservation Corporation (GIPEC), to 

make Governors Island an educational 

and civic resource of special historic 

character, and a recreational and open– 

space resource for the people of New 

York and the United States. 

The combination of preservation and 

programming activities would make the 

National Monument a major New York 

City and Harbor attraction, drawing 

local visitors back repeatedly and 

drawing national and international 

audiences. 

The planning team has completed the 

evaluation and found that an adjustment 

to include the remainder of the glacis 

(approximately 10 acres) would meet 

the official criteria and would be 

justifiable under certain circumstances. 

In addition to the selected alternative, 

three other alternatives, including a noaction alternative, were presented and 

analyzed in the Draft and Final 

Environmental Impact Statements. To 

help guide and structure the 

formulation and analysis of the 

alternatives, a set of criteria and goals 

were established by the planning team; 

each alternative had to meet these goals 

in its own way: 

Resource Preservation Goals 

• The uses of Fort Jay, Castle 

Williams, and other resources managed 

by the NPS are compatible with the 

purpose and significance of the National 

Monument. 

• The island’s other important 

resources and values that provide the 

context and add to the significance to 

the National Monument, including 

archeological resources, historic 

structures, and cultural landscapes, are 

preserved. 

Visitor Experience Goals 

• Visitors are well oriented, 

comfortable and safe throughout their 

trip, including time at off-island 

departure points, on ferries, and while 

visiting the National Monument. 

• A variety of communications tools 

convey necessary information to visitors 

before, during, and after their visit, 

about the National Monument’s 

resources and programs, and 

opportunities to enjoy other NPS sites in 

the New York region. 

• Visitors understand the history of 

the island and the people who lived and 

worked there, and appreciate the 

island’s place in the history of New 

York Harbor and the nation. 

• Regular feedback from visitors 

enables National Monument staff to 

improve and enhance public 

programming and services. 

• Facilities and services within the 

National Monument and on the greater 

island meet visitors’ basic needs and 

enrich the overall experience, drawing 

visitors back to the island. 

Transportation Goals 

• Access to the National Monument is 

convenient, reliable, and available to 

visitors at a reasonable cost. Access is 

coordinated with the extensive public 

transportation network of the New York 

metropolitan area. 

• Ferries and on-island transportation 

systems employ sustainable 

technologies and are accessible to all 

National Monument visitors, staff, and 

contractors. When feasible, on-island 

transportation systems are shared and 

coordinated with other island 

organizations. 

Park Administration Goals 

• Administrative, interpretive, 

maintenance, and other staff, as well as 

facilities and other infrastructure, 

sustain the programs and operations of 

the National Monument and accomplish 

the NPS mission. 

• National Monument staff enjoy 

healthy and safe working conditions. 

Collaboration and Partnership Goal 

• Formal partnerships and informal 

associations with other agencies and 

organizations assist with the 

preservation and public enjoyment of 

the National Monument. These 

partnerships and other collaborative 

projects support the NPS and National 

Monument missions. 

After careful consideration and 

review of the purpose and significance 

of Governors Island National Monument 

and its establishing Presidential 

Proclamations, other laws and policies 

including the Organic Act, National 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 22, 2009 / Notices 36253 

Environmental Policy Act, National 

Historic Preservation Act and the 2006 

NPS Management Policies, and input 

received from the public during the 

planning process, Alternative D was 

chosen by NPS as the alternative to be 

implemented. Compared to all the 

alternatives considered, the selected 

alternative best fulfills the mandates of 

the Presidential Proclamations, the 

purpose and significance, and the other 

laws and policies guiding the NPS and 

the Monument. By partnering with 

others to help protect, interpret and 

educate visitors about the Monument, 

the island and New York Harbor, the 

Monument’s long-term future, viability 

and relevance is assured. 

The selected alternative best protects 

park resources while also providing 

high-quality visitor experiences 

including effective educational and 

interpretive programs focused on 

Governors Island National Monument’s 

purpose, significance and goals. 

Implementation of the selected 

alternative will not result in the 

impairment of park resources and 

values. Provisions in the selected 

alternative are incorporated to protect 

and enhance the park’s cultural and 

natural resources, and provide for highquality visitor experiences. Negative 

impacts are minor or moderate in 

intensity. Overall, the selected 

alternative will have beneficial effects 

on cultural and natural resources, the 

visitor experience and park operations. 

The Record of Decision includes a 

statement of the decision made, 

synopses of other alternatives 

considered, the basis for the decision, a 

description of the environmentally 

preferable alternative, a finding on 

impairment of park resources and 

values, a list of measures to minimize 

environmental harm, and an overview 

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

result of a public planning process that 

began in 2003. Between 2003 and 2007, 

prior to the release of the Draft GMP/ 

EIS, NPS staff met with and briefed 

representatives from numerous agencies 

and organizations about the GMP and 

NPS’s future plans on Governors Island. 

Additional public involvement 

activities followed the release of the 

Draft GMP/EIS and a detailed analysis 

of public comment with NPS responses 

was provided in the Final GMP/EIS. The 

official responsible for this decision is 

the NPS Regional Director, Northeast 

Region. 

Dated: June 11, 2009. 

Dennis R. Reidenbach, 

Regional Director, Northeast Region, National 

Park Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–17376 Filed 7–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket Number FWS–R9–MB–2009–N0097; 

91200–1231–9BPP] 

Migratory Birds; Take of Peregrine 

Falcons for Use in Falconry 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: In December 2008 we 

completed an Environmental 

Assessment on take of peregrine falcons 

for use in falconry. This notice is to 

inform the public of the allocation of 

take of nestling and migrant peregrine 

falcons in 2009 agreed on by the States. 

It also will inform interested individuals 

about which States will allow take of 

nestling or migrant peregrine falcons. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

George Allen, Division of Migratory Bird 

Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, at 703–358–1825. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Our 

authority to govern take of raptors is 

derived from the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act (16 U.S.C. 703–712), which 

prohibits any person from taking, 

possessing, purchasing, bartering, 

selling, or offering to purchase, barter, 

or sell, among other things, raptors 

(birds of prey) listed in 50 CFR 10.13 

unless the activities are allowed under 

Federal regulations. Take and 

possession of raptors for use in falconry 

is governed by regulations at 50 CFR 

21.29. 

In 2007, we completed an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) on 

falconry and raptor propagation take (72 

FR 31268; June 6, 2007), in which we 

selected an alternative that will ensure 

that take of raptors for these purposes 

will be well below levels that will affect 

their populations. However, that EA did 

not consider of take of fall migrant 

peregrine falcons (Falco peregrinus), 

which may originate outside the United 

States. 

We completed an EA on take of 

migrant peregrine falcons in 2008 (73 

FR 74508; December 8, 2008). Our 

preferred alternative was to allow take 

of 116 nestling and postfledging firstyear peregrine falcons from the nesting 

period through 31 August west of 100 

degrees W longitude (including Alaska), 

and allow a take of 36 first-year migrant 

peregrine falcons between 20 September 

and 20 October from anywhere in the 

United States east of 100 degrees W 

longitude. 

Allocation of the 36 fall migrant 

peregrine falcons to be taken from the 

United States east of 100 degrees W 

longitude was agreed upon by the 

Atlantic, Mississippi, and Central 

Flyways. We expect the allowed take of 

the fall migrants in 2009 to be as 

follows: 

State Allowed 

take 

Maryland ....................................... 4 

Virginia .......................................... 4 

North Carolina .............................. 3 

South Carolina .............................. 2 

Georgia ......................................... 5 

Arkansas ....................................... 3 

Mississippi .................................... 3 

Oklahoma ..................................... 2 

Texas ............................................ 10 

Total .......................................... 36 

In the western United States, the 

Central and Pacific Flyways allocation 

complies with the provisions of our 

2008 Final Environmental Assessment, 

to total no more than 41 nestlings in 

Alaska and 75 in the remaining western 

States. We expect take of nestling 

peregrines to be allowed in 2009 in 9 

States, as follows: 

State Allowed 

take 

Alaska ........................................... 6 

Washington ................................... 9 

Idaho ............................................. 0 

Montana ........................................ 5 

Oregon .......................................... 7 

Utah .............................................. 11 

Wyoming ....................................... 5 

California ....................................... 0 

Nevada ......................................... 0 

Colorado ....................................... 4 

Arizona .......................................... 8 

New Mexico .................................. 2 

Total .......................................... 57 

Western States continue to have the 

authority to determine allocation of take 

of nestlings. Take in previous years has 

been much less than we allowed, and 

has been consistent with other take of 

raptors for falconry. Therefore, after this 

year we will not publish information 

about allocation of nestling take. 

We expect the Flyways to review the 

allocation of the take of passage 

peregrines each year. We will continue 

to work with them on the issue, and 

may publish notices about it in the 

future. As noted in the Final EA on take 

of migrant peregrines, we will review 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES