Jump to main content.

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

 

[Federal Register: December 6, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 236)]
[Notices]               

[Page 64758-64759]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]






DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service

 


Record of Decision; Final Environmental Impact Statement General 
Management Plan; Richmond National Battlefield Park, Virginia



    Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (Pub. L. 91-190 as amended), and specifically to 
regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR 
1505.2), the Department of the Interior, National Park Service, has 
prepared the following Record of Decision on the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS) for the General Management Plan for the Richmond 
National Battlefield Park (RNBP), Virginia.
    Introduction: Richmond National Battlefield Park, located in 
Hanover County, Henrico County, Chesterfield County, and the City of 
Richmond, Virginia, was established in 1936 by the Congress of the 
United States as part of the National Park System for the battlefield's 
historic significance.

    Public Law 95-625, the National Parks and Recreation Act, requires 
the preparation and timely revision of GMPs for each unit of the 
national park system. Section 604 of that Act outlines several 
requirements for GMPs, including measures for the protection of the 
area's resources and ``indications of potential modifications to the 
external boundaries of the unit and the reasons therefor.'' The 
previous general plan for this Park was completed in 1971, called the 
Master Plan for Richmond National Battlefield Park. The issues at RNBP 
have changed dramatically since 1971. New challenges for park 
management have emerged since then.

    This General Management Plan/Environmental Impact Statement 
identifies the purpose, significance, and primary interpretive themes 
for RNBP. The Plan addresses visitor experience, resource protection, 
and administrative requirements that will affect the park over 
approximately the next 15 years.

    Background: The Park owns 763.99 acres in 11 individual units 
spread over a 132-square mile area. The Park interprets the repeated 
efforts by the Union army in 1862 and 1864-65 to take Richmond, the 
capital of the Confederacy, and to destroy the Army or Northern 
Virginia. The Park contains relatively few acres for the thirty plus 
battles that occurred in the area. Many visitors expect to see more 
battlefield land preserved and support addition of more acreage to the 
park. The Congressional definition of the boundary for the park 
includes too much land for some property owners and local government 
representatives.

    The park evolved from private and state actions to protect the 
battlefields. The March 2, 1936, authorizing act of Congress (49 Stat. 
1155) defines the mission of RNBP as follows:



    Decision (Selected Action): The National Park Service will 
implement the proposed action as described in the Final Environmental 
Impact Statement released July 29, 1996.
    The National Park Service will manage resources, staff, and 
visitors in order to preserve the battlefields and interpret the 
military actions of the Richmond Civil War integrated with an 
understanding of the importance of the Confederate capital to both 
sides. Visitors will be directed to battlefields and other Civil War 
resource sites in Virginia. The main visitor center will remain at 
Chimborazo Park augmented with interpretation of the hospital story; 
NPS will continue to explore the possibilities for cooperative 
development of a heritage education/Civil War visitor center in 
Richmond. The plan responds actively to the Civil War Sites Advisory 
Commission report to Congress recommending federal involvement in 
protection of certain battlefields. RNBP's enabling legislation is 
proposed to be amended by Congress to authorize the appropriation and 
expenditure of federal funds for the purchase of battlefield lands, 
including specific tracts outside the existing legislative boundary. In 
order to allay concerns of property owners and be specific for 
potential donations, the NPS will request that Congress (1) redefine 
the authorized boundary of RNBP to reduce it to include approximately 
7,121 acres, within which battlefield resource protection and/or 
interpretation would be accomplished through a partnership among local, 
state, and federal government and the private sector; and (2) stipulate 
that any real property interest acquired by the NPS be acquired only on 
a willing seller basis; and (3) authorize that appropriated funds may 
be used to acquire interest in real estate. The environmental 
consequences of this plan will include expansion of the battlefield 
resource protection effort, and, with partnerships with other entities, 
a greatly improved and integrated interpretation of all the Civil War 
resources in the Richmond area. Expanded partnerships and resource 
protection efforts would lead to an expanded visitor base. More 
visitors to the battlefields will result in longer visits to the area 
by more people, resulting in expanded heritage tourism and increased 
tourist spending. The benefits will positively affect the metropolitan 
Richmond area. Nationally significant battlefields would enjoy a 
greater measure of protection and natural resources would be carefully 
considered as cultural resource restoration and management plans are 
developed.

    Basis for Decision: The draft plan for this park's general 
management was carefully crafted over a five year period with 
considerable public input.

    At Richmond National Battlefield Park (RNBP) there is an 
opportunity to convey to visitors the meaning of the war. Not only is 
there a strategic explanation for the battles at Richmond, but also the 
Confederate capital's industrial, economic, political, and social 
fabric merge with the battlefield stories there. The concentration of 
diverse Civil War resources found in the Richmond area is unparalleled. 
A site-specific focus on the battles at Richmond, the combatants, and 
an understanding of why those battles occurred at Richmond can 
contribute to a visitor's understanding of the complexity of the 
American past and provide a means to appreciate strengths and 
shortcomings in our collective heritage. With a carefully developed 
battlefield preservation, commemoration, and interpretive effort, 
including close cooperation with other public and private agencies 
preserving Civil War resources, RNBP can become



[[Page 64759]]



a moving and eloquent place where visitors can examine for themselves 
the meaning of the American Civil War and its relevance in the modern 
world.

    Protection and interpretation of the battlefield resources around 
Richmond has engendered debates about where, how much, and by whom 
since the local citizenry began the push for battlefield preservation 
early this century. In 1927 the Richmond Battlefield Parks Corporation 
began assembling the original battlefield acreage; and in 1932 the 
corporation deeded all of its property to the Commonwealth of Virginia 
to become Virginia's first state park--the Richmond Battlefield State 
Park. That same year, a study done by the Secretary of War for the U.S. 
Congress determined that these acres were appropriate for acquisition 
by the War Department should they be offered for donation. The War 
Department study further recommended that an additional 1,905 acres of 
core battlefield land be purchased. The donation was ultimately 
accepted by federal authorities, but he recommendation regarding 
additional land acquisition was not acted upon. In 1993 the 
Congressionally chartered Civil War Sites Advisory Commission submitted 
its report that highlighted seven (7) battlefields around Richmond in 
the list of the fifty most significant and most threatened battlefields 
in the country. This Plan is consistent with the recommendations of the 
Commission.

    Other Alternatives Considered: Three other alternatives to the 
selected action were considered: (1). Under the no-action alternative, 
the park would continue to have amorphously defined boundaries that 
include large portions of developed land and would emphasize 
recreational development. This alternative was defined by the 1971 Park 
Master Plan and supporting implementation plans. The interpretive ideas 
were to deemphasize battle tactics and explain the Civil War in general 
in Richmond with no attempt to lead visitors on an interpretive theme 
from one site to another. Chimborazo would revert to the City while a 
new visitor center and headquarters would be constructed at Fort 
Harrison; (2) The first development option would create a new visitor 
center in downtown Richmond and deemphasize battlefield preservation. 
Interpretation would emphasize the importance of the Confederate 
capital, and visitors would be directed to a wide range of surviving 
Civil War resources in the metropolitan Richmond area; (3) The other 
development option would emphasize an expanded battlefield land 
protection and cultural/natural landscape scene restoration effort. The 
visitor center would be located adjacent to a battlefield, and 
interpretation would emphasize the military actions to take the city.
    Measures to Minimize Impacts and Address Public Concerns: The 
environmental consequences of the proposed action and the other 
alternatives were fully documented in the DEIS and are re-presented 
with modifications in the FEIS. The public review period on the DEIS 
ended October 2, 1995. The ``Affected Environment'' section that 
follows the alternatives described the park's surroundings and 
community context, the current visitor experience, existing cultural 
and natural resources, and current park operations and administration. 
In the Environmental Consequences section the proposal and alternatives 
are analyzed for their general and specific impacts on the visitor 
experience, resource protection, park administration, and the 
surrounding community.

    The results of public comment on the DEIS are included in the FEIS. 
A major concession on the part of the National Park Service was to 
eliminate objectionable provisions of the power of eminent domain and 
to propose to buy land from willing sellers only. Further, the Savage 
Station battlefield and parts of the Totopotomy Creek battlefield were 
dropped from the proposed boundary. The main Visitor Center is planned 
to remain at Chimborazo and partnerships with the private and public 
sectors pursued to augment visitor services to establish a Civil War 
center in Richmond.

    Also in response to public comment, this action reaffirms the NPS 
commitment to battlefield resource protection and responds actively to 
the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission report to Congress recommending 
federal involvement at certain battlefields. Changes in the park's 
enabling legislation would be sought to authorize the appropriation and 
expenditure of federal funds for the purchase of battlefield lands, 
including specific tracts outside the existing legislative boundary. 
These changes will enable RNBP to be a more effective steward and 
partner with private interests and local and state governments to 
protect the principal Civil War resources associated with the long and 
difficult struggle for the capital of the Confederacy and to interpret 
these resources so as to foster an understanding of their significance 
as parts of a whole. If the legislation is not enacted, the plan will 
be able to be effected except that property would be acquired only 
through the use of donations.

    The no-action period on this final plan and environmental impact 
statement ended September 9, 1996, thirty (30) days after the 
publication of a notice of availability in the Federal Register.
    Environmentally Preferable Action: The environmentally preferred 
alternative is the one that causes the least damage to the biological 
and physical environment. If is the alternative that best protects, 
preserves and enhances the historic, cultural, and natural resources of 
the area where the proposed action is to take place.
    The proposal is the alternative the best fits the definition. This 
Plan will best protect resources cultural and natural.
    Conclusion: The above factors and considerations justify selection 
of the preferred alternative as the General Management Plan for the 
Richmond National Battlefield Park as identified and detailed in the 
final EIS.

    Park personnel will begin working with local and state officials, 
the private sector, other staff of the National Park Service, and the 
Congress of the United States to implement the plan.



    Dated: November 25, 1996.

Cynthia MacLeod,

Superintendent, Richmond National Battlefield Park, (804) 226-1981.
    Dated: November 26, 1996.

Warren D. Beach,

Assistant Field Director, Northeast Field Area, (215) 597-7013.
[FR Doc. 96-30702 Filed 12-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-M

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.